Xalan backward compatibility problem

I am migrating my application from Jrun to JBoss.
And I am getting the following problem.
java.lang.VerifyError: (class: org/apache/xalan/xpath/xdom/XercesLiaison, method: parse signature: (Lorg/xml/sax/InputSource;)V) Incompatible object argument for function call
 java.lang.Class.forName0(Native Method)
 java.lang.Class.forName(Class.java:141)
 org.apache.xalan.xslt.XSLTEngineImpl.<init>(XSLTEngineImpl.java:360)
 org.apache.xalan.xslt.XSLTProcessorFactory.getProcessor(XSLTProcessorFactory.java:79)
 resins.ivtrack.xml.DocumentManager.initXSLProcessor(DocumentManager.java:339)
 resins.ivtrack.xml.DocumentManager.transform(DocumentManager.java:617)
 resins.ivtrack.servlet.FormServlet.requestForm(FormServlet.java:521)
 resins.ivtrack.servlet.FormServlet.processRequest(FormServlet.java:187)
 resins.ivtrack.servlet.FormServlet.doGet(FormServlet.java:793)
 javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:697)
 javax.servlet.http.HttpServlet.service(HttpServlet.java:810)
 org.jboss.web.tomcat.filters.ReplyHeaderFilter.doFilter(ReplyHeaderFilter.java:75)
The piece of code from where the error is coming out is
xslprocessor = org.apache.xalan.xslt.XSLTProcessorFactory.getProcessor();
As per my understanding there is a version minmatch problem.
The application is running fine in JRun which is using jdk1.1.3.
But when I run the same code in JBoss, I am getting the above problem. Jdk1.4.2 is installed on the JBoss server.
Please help
Thanks,
Mehul

Check out this thread:
http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=492221&messageID=3017648
/Per

Similar Messages

Backward compatibility problem...acrobat 8.0 vs reader 6.0

Not sure if this is the right forum, but will start here & move if necessary.
We have been using Acrobat 8.0 for 2-3 years & have never had a problem 'til now. We will be creating a series of documents 1-10 pages long, with sound clips in them & anticipate that some of the systems viewing the documents may be as dated as W98, so we set the PDF configuration to be backward compatible to reader 6.0.
Earlier today I downloaded a copy of reader 6.0, just to make sure all worked...it didn't. Instead, I get "this file appears to use a new format that this version of acrobat does not support."
The document I used to test was, again, creadted w/acrobat 8.0, set for backward compatibility to reader 6.0. The document was 4 pages long with 4 color photographs & 2 .mp3 sound clips embedded.
Anybody have any ideas where the problem is? The test file reads OK on current version readers, so does Acrobat 8.0 not really generate backward compatible documents?

Follow Bernd's suggestion. You probably added something to the file after creation (like the sound clips) and the method you used is not AA6 compatible. Saving the file (or save as) does not preserve the version compatibility, but changes it to AA8. To maintain backward compatibile versions, you have to be sure you do not add AA8 only features and use Reduce File Size or PDF Optimize to save the file as an AA6 compatibile file.
Typically AA6 will open an AA8 file, but will ignore any new feature. You may have added something it can not handle. I don't recall if AA6 could handle embedded mp3 files.

FORMS60 back to FORMS50 backward compatibility problems.

I've got an application that was developed (not implemented) using Forms60/Reports60 but now have a need to move it back to a Forms50/Reports30 environment. Currently, I can't save the .frm files from version 6.0 to version 5.0. Anyone figured a way around this? Also, any issues with the reports from version 6.0 back to 3.0?

Thanks for pointing me in this direction Srini. 
 I tried to deploy the sample BlackBoxNoTx connector to WL 9.1 and it worked for me too. This got me wondering what was different in my connector. And then I realized it was the permission settings in my ra.xml :- 
 <security-permission> 
 <description>Granting all permissions</description> 
 <security-permission-spec> 
 Â grant{permission java.security.AllPermission;}; 
 </security-permission-spec> 
 </security-permission> 
 
 Once I removed this from my descriptor, my connector deployed OK.
 
 To be absolutely sure, I added the permission setting to the sample BlackBoxNoTx connector, regenerated the RAR, and redeployed it, upon which it failed with the exception that prompted me to start this thread in the first place.
 
 Unfortunately, I cannot do away with the permission setting for my connector.
 
 I am now more certain than ever that WL 9.1's backward compatibility with JCA 1.0 is suspect.
 Anyone from BEA listening ????
 
 Is there a way I can file this for BEA to fix?

Backward compatibility of MS Flash object in Windows 8

I have a case opened with Microsoft from Pfizer, Inc and need a case open with Adobe so that the MS engineers can communicate with Adobe within non-disclosure constraints.
What MS needs from Adobe are debugging information the don't have in order to resolve the issue in their Win8 Flash object (15x). MS will need to share with Adobe details and data that belong to Pfizer hence need to open that channel for those purposes and for MS to request technical information from Adobe.
My MS case number is 114111712050982 so that you have that information and can share email addresses and phone numbers privately with Flash technical support.
I have picked the best fit I could find for a community

As a general rule, we'd highly recommend that everyone move from fscommand to ExternalInterface. It's a superior replacement and eliminates some of the weird quirks that fscommand has. In your situation, changes to IE11 caused backwards compatibility problems with fscommand, but ExternalInterface is unaffected. We have some work in the pipeline to address the issue on IE11, but it has the potential to break existing content on configs that currently work, so we're trying to be really methodical about providing public pre-releases and soliciting feedback. In 2014, the only high-traffic content that really uses fscommand are old enterprise applications, so it's hard for us to collect feedback or gauge the impact directly by looking at popular sites.
We just handed a build off with the proposed fscommand changes to Microsoft for inclusion in the next Windows 10 technical preview. We were soliciting feedback on any related fallout for Windows 7 users on our beta channel (http://www.adobe.com/go/flashplayerbeta); however, there's not a good way to provide a beta build for Windows 8 since Flash Player is a built-in component of IE. We're working with Microsoft to establish a beta program for Flash Player in IE on Win8+. If you have access to the Win10 Technical Preview builds, we'd encourage you to test any of your legacy systems that require Flash and give us feedback once the next update is available.
The fact that introducing a proxy solves the problem intermittently is interesting. I guess it could be some internal timing, or it might be that the proxy is masking a cross-domain policy issue or an SSL negotiation problem. Have you guys tried with a Debugger version of Flash Player? You might get some useful feedback, particularly if it's a policy file thing.
Adobe Flash Player - Downloads
Configure the debugger version of Flash Player
You can turn on policy file logging by adding these to your mm.cfg. They'll get logged to flashlog.txt:
PolicyFileLog=1 # Enables policy file logging
PolicyFileLogAppend=1 # Optional; do not clear log at startup

General Question about JRE - Versions and backward compatibility etc

Could someone maybe help me with this query?
I've got a group of network users who use a total of four java applications which I am told require different versions of the Java Runtime Environment to run.
Is it therefore possible to have muliple versions of the RTE installed on one user machine to make all applications work at once or is it simply a case of having to have only one version of the JRE.
I'm talking mainly about in house applications so I guess if some of them are incompatible with the latest JRE then the answer might be to find out what the problem is and fix the application so it works in the lates jre - or am I missing something?

Hello,
First of all, it is possible to keep several JRE installed in Windows. For example, my PC has JRE 1.3.1.8, 1.4.0.1, 1.4.2.6.
Second. A tecnology exists to cause a Windowst to run a specific JRE for a specific Java applet. Please see the text below.
HTML Applet Configuration
� The standard (Internet) method of calling Java Runtime when using a Java Applet is to use an Applet tag within the HTML file itself specifying the applet details (example below). This tries to attach itself to Microsoft Java Runtime registry CLSID as detailed above.
<applet code=Applet1.class width="200" height="200">
Your browser does not support the <code>applet</code> tag.
</applet>
� When the above call is made either, a) the applet will load in the Microsoft Java Runtime, b) the applet will load in a particular Sun Java Runtime as it�s being redirected or c) the applet won�t load at all as Microsoft Java Runtime isn�t installed and Sun Java isn�t set as default.
� The above can be uncontrolled as to what version of Java (if any) is actually used to launch an applet so have an alternative solution is to us the Object tag in place of the Applet tag. It�s only suitable for Internet Explorer in an internal, Intranet environment but should be ideal for us.
� By replacing the Applet HTML tag with the Object tag when loading an applet you can specify in the tag either to use the latest installed version of Sun Java or a specific version by putting it�s CLSID in the list. (example below.)
<OBJECT
classid="clsid:CAFEEFAC-0014-0002-0006-ABCDEFFEDCBB"
width="200" height="200">
<PARAM name="code" value="Applet1.class">
</OBJECT>
� The advantage in the above approach is we can install a specific version of Java, i.e. 1.4.2.06 that doesn�t redirect the Microsoft Java Runtime so won�t effect other applications, and we can be safe in the knowledge that even if we install a newer version of Java on a machine that has 1.4.2.06 we won�t have any backwards compatibility problems.
� The Object tag is an Internet Explorer only solution, but could be scaled, as to load a different version of Java you specify a different CLSID, whether that�s one of the versions of Sun Java or Microsoft Java or you can specify a CLSID that covers the latest installed version of Sun Java if you don�t want to tie the application to a specific version.
Further details on the use of the Applet and Object tags can be found on the Sun website below so they may be of use if the HTML code that calls the Java applet can be easily changed to support our requirements.
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/plugin/developer_guide/using_tags.html
http://java.sun.com/products/plugin/versions.html

Workaround for lack of backward compatibility?

Is there any workaround for the new iOS7 Pages' lack of backward compatibility? I am still running Pages '09 on my MacBook Pro and won't upgrade to Mavericks until it's reached version 9.02 or so. The new Pages tells me that any doc I open will no longer be compatible with any version of Pages except the newest one. I also see in reviews of the new Mavericks Pages that some people are losing formatting etc of their old Pages docs in the new version because of this backward compatibility problem, and that makes me even less inclined to upgrade given how many Pages docs I have that May be unreadable in the new version.
Any suggestions accepted. Thanks.

I solved my own problem. I'm posting how in the hope it'll benefit others. This will only work after you have synced your iPad to iTunes on your computer.
First, I recovered the old version of Pages from my laptop's trash.
Second, I made a copy of the old version, went into user/music/iTunes/Mobile Applications and removed the new version of Pages and pasted in the copy of the old version.
Third, I opened iTunes and clicked on "Apps" in the "Library" section of the Sidebar. I then dragged and dropped the old verison of Pages onto the Apps screen in iTunes. iTunes asked me if I wanted to replace a newer version with an older one and I clicked on "yes."
Fourth, I deleted the new version of Pages from my iPad.
And fifth, I synced the iPad with iTunes, which copied the old verison of Pages onto the iPad.
I have a feeling that step 2 is redundant, but I've done that kind of thing before and it has seemed to work.

Backwards Compatability of iWeb?..Problems

On my main mac pro, I have all the latest updates of software etc. and my new iweb site (which is published but not yet launched) works great in Firefox and Safari.
BTW..I'm still in the 60 day trial period.
On my older mac at my other desk, I'm running 10.3.9 with Netscape,Safari, and Internet Explorer, all of which are (i think) updated as far as they can go in 10.3.9.
Problem: the site does not load and function properly on the older mac. Top menue bar is gone, and the photo gallery page comes up blank.
What is the backwards compatability of this iWeb program?? MOST visiters to a site are NOT going to have the latest and greatest software. Plus, I have NO idea about PC's.
This could be a deal breaker for anyone who wants to use .Mac in a more serious capacity.
Any thoughts of ideas??
Craig

The 10.3.9 Safari version does not support a lot of the advanced code that Safari 2 creates. For those users I believe the latest Firefox browser will work for them. With the release of Leopard imminent 10.3 is getting left further and further behind.
The latest Internet Explorer version does handle the iWeb 2 pages satisfactorily as I understand. You can go to http://ipinfo.info/netrenderer/ and past your site's URL into the URL field provided and see how the different versions of IE will render the page. I think it does a fair job in duplicating how it will look. But I don't have a PC to compare.

Adobe Acrobat -Create PDF 1.0 does not work in FireFox 4.How do i directly convert pages to PDF??Why is that your products are not backward compatable.U people are in the IT industry and should know this.Shame on You people.learn somthing form the IE team

While Updating to Fire Fox 4. It said Adobe Acrobat -Create PDF 1.0 is not supported.How come 3.6 supports but not 4. I believe you people have never heard of the term "Backward Compatibility" .U people will loose your customer/support base if every new version doesn't support some existing stuff.

'''Problem Solved FINALLY !'''
Solution:
I just updated my '''Adobe Acrobat X Pro''' to '''Version 10.1.0'''.By the way, I have to complain, Adobe is really slow in solving this problem...
Here is the official link for the Adobe Acrobat update.[http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5135 <click me!>http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5135<click me!>]
After update, the extention changed from "Adobe Acrobat -Create PDF 1.0" into "Adobe Acrobat - Create PDF 1.1". And the '''"Adobe Acrobat - Create PDF 1.1" is compatiable with the firefox 4.0.1'''. A screenshot is attached as a proof.

Solaris 8 backwards compatibility

Hi,
I am about to begin some java development for the Solaris 8 platform on SPARC, and am setting up a dev server. I'd rather install Solaris 9 for reasons of general superiority, but are there any reasons that compiled java binaries from v9 would have problems running on a v8 platform when its deployed? It won't be particularly low-level design: just some database access, tcp/ip SOAP messaging, and XML manipulations.
thanks
aj

In general there is forward compatibility for applications between Solaris releases. There is no official backward compatibility. This means you
should always compile on the oldest release of
Solaris that you expectto run on. So, if you need
to run on Solaris 5.6, 7 and 8, compile on Solaris 5.6.
There is a tool called appcert which is shipped with
later versions of Solaris 8 and can be downloaded from:
http://www.sun.com/developers/tools/appcert/download.html
That will give you a good idea of the forward and backward compatibility of your application. General ABI information can be found at:
http://www.sun.com/developers/tools/abi/index.html
Alan
Sun Developer Technical Support
http://www.sun.com/developers/support

Does OSX do "backward compatibility to Acrobat Reader version 6"?

I need to prepare a PDF file from my Pages document, and it required to provide "backward compatibility to Acrobat Reader version 6." Apparently this is something Acrobat Distiller can do but I don't have that app. How can I get Pages to make such a PDF file, or how can I convert the one Pages makes to that format? (I looked at ColorSync Utility but didn't see anything relevant among its PDF filters.)
Quick advice would be very much appreciated!

PeterBreis0807 wrote:
is rendered down to only 72dpi.
Peter
Which can be worked around. [PDF/X Problems in Leopard|http://pagesfaq.blogspot.com/2009/01/pdfx-problems-in-leopard.html]
You have to use cmd + P when creating PDF files from Pages with this new option.
Message was edited by: fruhulda

Plug-in 5.8.0 Compatibility Problem with Pr 8.2

Hi Guys
I'm running Win7, SP1 with a NVidia Quadro FX 3800 card. Is it me or is CC2014 a bug laden step backwards?
Apart from the serious CUDA issue users are facing, since a couple of updates ago I get a compatibility problem. Whenever I try to launch Audition or AE (or even SmartSounds) from an open Pr project, I get an error message saying "Premiere Pro version 8.2 is not compatible with Premiere Pro Plug-in version 5.8.0." The issue first appeared in 8.1.
Has anyone else faced this issue and how can I resolve it (before I throw in the towel and go back to CS5!?)
Regards,
Graham

Thanks, Ann. I hadn't realised there was a 5.8.1 update, which seems to have solved the problem (I thought it was something deeper as the error appeared when I tried to open AE through the DL.

Is it backward compatibility of IME 9

Please,
I would like if anybody knows Intel Management Engine Drivers 9 are backward compatible with IME 7 and 8.
I have not found Intel communication on this subject.
Did anybody use it with P67A-GD55 Motherboard and Sandy Bridge Processor ?
Thank you.

momsola, Bernhard,
As I said before, I gladly admit being wrong.
And in answer of the initial question, yes the IME 9 driver seems to be backward compatible.
I've installed that driver on my P67A-GD65 board in a virtual environment running an evaluation version of Windows Server 2012 and did some initial testing using the last version of ControlCenterII. Although I haven't experienced any problems, I find it still too premature to install it in my real environment. I would also like to see some release notes confirming the backward compatibility or the known problems, but Intel did not include them in the package.
Furthermore, Intel specifically states for which boards the download is intended and that doesn't include any Intel-based boards.
Quote from: brtj on 25-April-13, 05:01:36
I'm still doubtful if the IME drivers are of much use on non-Intel boards.
I must correct myself.
I came across this article (http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/architecture-guide-intel-active-management-technology) that provides a pretty decent explanation of the function of IME and its position within Intel's AMT architecture (which in turn is part of Intel's vPro technology).
As AMT is a mainly presented as a business solution for centralized management of (remote) workstations, above all, it targets the corporate market. Because IME is part of AMT the same applies to IME.
(By the way, the IME driver package also includes updates to other AMT components, which are installed when applicable.)
However that doesn't imply that it's completely useless for the private market. MSI's ControlCenterII (whether you like it or not) is a good example and I suspect that other OEMs have comparable solutions.
As you probably already know HECI(x64).SYS is the file name of the IME driver, therefore I would also recommend reading the Wikipedia article on HECI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HECI). It contains a practical example how IME functions/operates.
Quote from: Bernhard on 25-April-13, 00:04:02
The detailed content of the so-called management engine extension remains a grey area, [..]
I hope the aforementioned articles shed some more light.
Quote from: Bernhard on 25-April-13, 00:04:02
[...] but the known details seem to be functions that quite frankly should be handled by the normal BIOS.
After reading these articles (and some more on the subject) I disagree with you.

PP backwards compatibility format after import/edit in Captivate 5

I was trying to find an original PowerPoint presentation today that I'd used for a Captivate video (.F4V) but when I got to the directory that I was expecting it in I found 2 copies of it.
I examined the 2 copies and they appeared the same, except one was in Office 2007 format (the version we run) and the other was in 2003 compatible format (the default we run, for backwards compatibility with students' software). The 2 files were marked as being editied 5 minutes apart.
It struck me that I'd used the "Edit in PowerPoint" feature to change one of the slides in the presentation via Captivate.
It's not a problem, more for future reference, but when I edited the presentation did Captivate bypass our default settings and save the presentation in MS Office 2007 native format? Is there and easy way round this or is it just down to me to manage my files?
Thanks in advance.

No, Scott, Captivate has never been backwards compatible, and that is also the case for CP6: you can upgrade a CP5.5 file to CP6 but you cannot open a CP6-file with CP5.5.
Lilybiri

USB 3.0 to 2.0 backwards compatibility

I recently purchased a GoFlex 3TB drive to use with my MacBook Pro running the latest version of Snow Leopard. The drive is advertised to be USB 3.0/USB 2.0 compatible.
I am running into issues where when plugged in directly to a USB port on my hub it will freeze the Finder on my computer and I have to hardboot the system. This has happened on multiple occasions with a otherwise extremely stable system. At one point I unplugged the power from the External Drive and my system recovered.
Thinking that I was going to use this for a "Time Machine" drive I plugged in directly into the USB port on Time Machine unit and tried to set it up and this time it froze the Time Machine and System Preferences, but not the finder. Again, a reboot was necessary to resolve the issue.
The problem follows where ever I plug it into, into the MAC freezes Finder, into the Time Machine freezes Time machine and System Preferences.
When I first installed it I selected the macintosh.dmg and followed the directions and it formatted as a journaled drive.
I am starting to suspect that there is a backwards compatibility issue with the new USB 3.0 spec and the USB 2.0 drivers that ships from Apple on their systems.
Any confirmation, help or direction on what might be going on would be appreciated. Thank you!

bwfbwf wrote:
Thinking that I was going to use this for a "Time Machine" drive
Be aware that if you need special drivers, you probably won't be able to do a full system restore when your internal HD fails or something else awful happens.
The reason is, you don't use OSX to do the restore; you use the Installer utility on your Install disc. It doesn't have that special driver, and there's no way to add it, so if your HD fails, and you boot up from the Install disc, it's probably not going to recognize the TM drive.
You'll have to install OSX first. When your Mac reboots, you also can't use +Setup Assistant+ to transfer your stuff; you'll have to set up a temporary Admin account, install the driver, then use +Migration Assistant.+
And using +Migration Assistant+ instead of +Setup Assistant+ can cause transferred user accounts to lose access to files on other disks, such as your backups.

Why is there no backwards compatibility? It seems blatantly obvious you are trying to force your users to upgrade in order to increase profits.

It is very frustrating when you purchase a VERY expensive software package that is the latest version only to start receiving "You can't open this because there's a newer version out" error messages less than a year later.
I know you're going to defend yourselves with some stock BS such as "Newer versions have capabilities that older version don't have", but I know this isn't the case. Illustrator could just open the newer versions and you know what, if there's some effect that isn't supported, just let it display it incorrectly. I'm almost positive that you've purposefully programmed your software to detect if a file is a newer version and then force illustrator to display the error and not open it.
I believe you are using dishonest and shady tactics to increase revenue, and I am very displeased.

@ joshmakar:
To a large extent, you are preaching to the choir here. Many long-time helpers in these fora have left in recent years, often over disillusion re: Adobe and it's current course in many areas.
While it is little consolation regarding the question/ problem in your initial post; if the newer AI file was saved with PDF compatibility ON (the default, I believe), you MAY be able to PLACE the file into an open Illustrator document. Exactly how editable it will remain is questionable, and depends on the file and what tools and effects may have been used. It is not backward compatibility, but it is (like so much in Adobe software any more) a workaround.
And, of course, one can always ask whoever supplied the file to save as an older format, but see my note above re: workarounds.
Who, Me? Cynical? NAH!
--OB

Xalan backward compatibility problem

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for