Re: E130003: The XML response contains invalid XML - Follow-up

2018-03-18 Thread Johan Corveleyn
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 4:57 PM, Philip Martin wrote: > Daniel Shahaf writes: > >> Philip Martin wrote on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:44 +: >> >> Changing "0" to "48" would also have broken the and >> offsets in that revision file, so how come

Re: E130003: The XML response contains invalid XML - Follow-up

2018-03-16 Thread Philip Martin
Daniel Shahaf writes: > Philip Martin wrote on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:44 +: > > Changing "0" to "48" would also have broken the and > offsets in that revision file, so how come 'verify' worked after > that change? In the examples he gave it looks like the root node

Re: E130003: The XML response contains invalid XML - Follow-up

2018-03-16 Thread Daniel Shahaf
Philip Martin wrote on Fri, 16 Mar 2018 13:44 +: > "NOCERA, ANDY" writes: > > > I used dump and load to debug the malformed node revision ID. Here > > are my steps and what learned. Looks like the revs' file text: entry > > has a zero instead of size. By just editing the

Re: E130003: The XML response contains invalid XML - Follow-up

2018-03-16 Thread Philip Martin
"NOCERA, ANDY" writes: > I used dump and load to debug the malformed node revision ID. Here > are my steps and what learned. Looks like the revs' file text: entry > has a zero instead of size. By just editing the size, verify worked. > No other change was required. The

fsfs 'structure' terminology: length/size v. size/expanded-size (was: Re: E130003: The XML response contains invalid XML - Follow-up)

2018-03-16 Thread Daniel Shahaf
[ cc += dev@ ] NOCERA, ANDY wrote on Thu, 15 Mar 2018 22:35 +: > Folks, > > I used dump and load to debug the malformed node revision ID. Here are > my steps and what learned. Looks like the revs' file text: entry has > a zero instead of size. To be clear, you mean the fourth field.

RE: E130003: The XML response contains invalid XML - Follow-up

2018-03-15 Thread NOCERA, ANDY
Folks, I used dump and load to debug the malformed node revision ID. Here are my steps and what learned. Looks like the revs' file text: entry has a zero instead of size. By just editing the size, verify worked. No other change was required. The question is can we correct this