Opened 8 years ago

Closed 8 years ago

# Magrating to Trac 0.11 breaks GraphVisPlugin

Reported by: Owned by: anonymous pkropf normal GraphvizPlugin normal bill.coffman@… 0.11

### Description

We just migrated from 0.10.3 to 0.11.1. Our GraphvizPlugin broke, however. I have updated to the version available at http://trac-hacks.swapoff.org/svn and 0.11 directory the message I get is: Graphviz macro processor has detected an error. Please fix the problem before continuing.

The command
[u'/usr/bin/dot', ”, u'-Tgif', u'-o/var/cache/trac/graphviz/d17c2d792b42ef258cd7d158e8ee3c04ebcb6de8.dot.gif']
failed with the the following output:

Error: dot: can't open


so the seconds parameter in this command is not getting filled with the file name.

If I run the above command with a file containing the contents of my dot file, instead of a blank, it works. So this is just the plugin not getting the file with my dot content.

### comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by anonymous

• Cc bill.coffman@… added; anonymous removed

### comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by anonymous

More specifics on our setup:

• O/S Debian Linux, Etch -- apt-get dist-upgrade as of a 9/15/08; 2.6.18-6-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Aug 18 10:36:19 UTC 2008 x86_64 GNU/Linux
• Apache 2.2.3-4+etch5
• python-minimal 2.4.4-2
• /var/lib/trac/conf/trac.ini
[graphviz]
cache_dir = /var/cache/trac/graphviz
cmd_path = /usr/bin
png_antialias = true

• the /var/cache/trac/graphviz directory exists, and is read/writable to apache processes.
• libapache2-mod-python 3.2.10-4

### comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by cboos

• Resolution set to duplicate
• Status changed from new to closed

Another #3605 duplicate, please have a look there for a fix.

### comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by anonymous

Yes, I saw this ticket before.

#3605 looks like some very different behavior though. About the only thing I can see in common is that it's broken after a migration. We have no real error messages, for instance, only the system command can't find the data for the graphviz call.

### comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by anonymous

but comment 2 of #3605 is identical. Thanks for the pointer