being options to compile of you c-plusplus source to
intermediate .o object files; you can use it during link time also if
you compile directly from c-plusplus to executable)
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Altenau, Maureen D CECOM RDEC C2D" wrote:
>
> I am getting errors when I c
to be
sure the packaging issues haven't been lost.
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
>
> Tinny Ng
> XML Parsers Development
> IBM Toronto Laboratory, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
hink it was decided the minor
release 1.5.2 wouldn't fix that, it was just a bugfix release. Someone
said probably in the next official release. I sure hope it isn't
forgotten about, it could be a *really* long time if it is.
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> - Corey "kaoru
"Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
>
> "D. Stimits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Is there an approximation of what a typical time is between releases for
> > bugfixes? Is it typical for it to occur monthly?
>
> No, but things are changing
I don't know why, but I always get two copies of replies.
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2001-10-17 at 22:51, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >
> > ...snip...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What is required to
gfix release itself will not reflect sane_includes, is
that correct? If the bugfix release does not reflect sane_includes, is
there a probable time frame beyond the bugfix release that will reflect
sane_includes?
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> Murray Cumming
> [EMAIL PROTECTED
"D. Stimits" wrote:
>
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> >
...snip...
> > > > I really have no idea what you're talking about. Could you try to
> > > > explain more concisely?
> > >
> > > Yes, I see a flaw in my argument (the paragraph
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2001-10-16 at 01:26, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2001-10-15 at 23:51, D. Stimits wrote:
> > ...snip...
> > > > >
> > > > > Please comment on the sane_includ
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2001-10-15 at 23:51, D. Stimits wrote:
...snip...
> > >
> > > Please comment on the sane_includes tarball.
> >
> > This tarball does what is required for portability in terms of providing
> > a "xercesc" pref
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2001-10-15 at 21:21, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Michael Huedepohl wrote:
> > >
> > ...snip...
> > > > > > > > > "Michael Huedepohl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > > &g
instead becomes:
./xercesc/whatever...
./src/...
An easier (but less direct) solution would be to unpack not just into a
versioned directory name, e.g., the current:
./xerces-c-src1_5_1/include/
./xerces-c-src1_5_1/src/
But instead to:
./xerces-c-src1_5_1/xercesc/include/
./xer
Michael Huedepohl wrote:
>
> "D. Stimits" wrote:
> >
> > "D. Stimits" wrote:
> > >
> > > Michael Huedepohl wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
> > > > >
x_include='${PREFIX}/include/xercesc'
This does not fix the problem for me. Maybe our bash interpreters are
different. The quoting does propagate to the generated configure as
shown below, so this is not the problem. Are you including this quoting
change on more than one configure.in? So far
install to
/usr/local/include/xercesc/ for headers, are you using runConfigure or
manually using some other steps? My command line is:
./runConfigure -plinux -cgcc -xg++ -rpthread
Alternately, I also append -P/usr/local.
My source is from xerces-c-src1_5_1.tar.gz.
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
"Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
>
> "D. Stimits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > 1289c1289
> > > < prefix_include=${prefix}/include/xercesc
> > > ---
> > > > prefix_include='${PREFIX}/include/xercesc'
>
include='${PREFIX}/include/xercesc'
>
> And here is the diff for configure (identical to the result of autoconf,
> for systems without autoconf):
>
> 1289c1289
> < prefix_include=${prefix}/include/xerce
"D. Stimits" wrote:
>
> Michael Huedepohl wrote:
> >
> > "Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
> > >
> > > "Michael Huedepohl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > "Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
> >
it is being ignored.
Further down in the configure file, the additional quotes come through
correctly, but "prefix" is till not even looking at ac_default_prefix
(it appears ac_default_prefix is inert):
prefix=NONE
I did not investigate if there is code somewhere that is supposed to
te
gure.in
> > > > using autoconf. Any changes to configure will be lost the next time
> > > > someone runs autoconf.
> > >
> > > Are you really sure?
> >
> > $ cp ./configure ./configure.bak
> > $ autoconf
> > $ diff ./configure ./confi
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 18:49, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >
> > >Part 1.1Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> > >Encoding: 7bit
> >
> > Environment variables pass through to Makefile
oling you into believing there is no bug.
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS: Having XERCESCROOT not default to the root of the tarball unpack,
and having it require manual intervention, is clumsy. It interferes with
clean install of Xerces-c within compound projects. No, it isn't a bug,
b
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 01:01, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 00:02, D. Stimits wrote:
> > > > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 2001-
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 00:02, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2001-10-10 at 19:02, D. Stimits wrote:
> > > > Where would I post, or ask for changes to the official Xerces
> > > &g
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2001-10-10 at 22:44, D. Stimits wrote:
> > "Jason E. Stewart" wrote:
> > >
> > > "Mark Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I would find this change extremely welcome.
Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2001-10-10 at 19:02, D. Stimits wrote:
> > Where would I post, or ask for changes to the official Xerces
> > distribution?
>
> Erm, this list, of course.
>
> Right now, the immediate change (and I can provide
> > Makefi
offering sane default values for some unset variables. Xerces is
an amazing piece of work, I'm surprised that configuration and
installation is so far behind the actual code. If users get frustrated
by it, and can't or won't use it, then it does no good for anyone.
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PRO
concerning configuration and packaging issues? Is there a more active
mailing list for such things?
D. Stimits, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
n
general? This could be part of the configuration stage since I can't
imagine building xerces from outside of the xerces source, unless there
is some requirement for distributed source. Is this due to some special
development environment? It complicates using xerces with other projects
a
28 matches
Mail list logo
