Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [eclipse-dev] XML Parsing In an Eclipse 3.0 Plugin

FYI -- there is an "endorsed override mechanism" for things like the XML parser. You can define a system property (ENDORSED_DIRS or something like that) and place override jars in there. Generally not a good idea, though, unless you really know what you're doing.
 
I really hate the fact that Sun keeps pulling more and more into the the java rt. It gives no flexibility for things like this...
-- Scott


From: eclipse-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Arthorne
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 11:11 AM
To: eclipse-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [eclipse-dev] XML Parsing In an Eclipse 3.0 Plugin


The short answer is that some distributions of Java 1.4 have xerces bundled in their class libraries.  This can cause conflicts with *any* version of xerces that you use, and short of messing with the system class loader or hacking the class libraries there is no workaround.  So, the Eclipse SDK no longer uses the org.apache.xerces plug-in at all, and uses Java 1.4 JAXP APIs instead.  See:

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=37696
http://java.sun.com/xml/jaxp/reference/faqs/index.html#JDK14
--


eclipse-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 01/26/2004 06:41:21 PM:

> Speaking of Eclipse, Xerces and plug-ins, M6 comes with an
> "org.apache.xerces" plugin that tags itself as "version 4.0.13" (which
> is GREATER THAN the actual latest xerces version number of 2.6.0) but on
> examining its plugin.xml also declares that "This is an IBM maintenance
> branch of xerces 2.0.0".  So, correct me if I'm wrong, but won't this
> older version override any 2.6.0 xerces.jar that I try to import for my
> plug-in?
>
> Furthermore, a grep of plugin.xml files show that none of the other
> plugins import org.apache.xerces - presumably they do their own XML
> thing, or use the JDK1.4 XML capabilities.
>
> Thus, should this plug-in be removed from the M7 distribution altogether?
>
> thanks,
> Nigel.
>

Back to the top