RE: Changing include to include/xercesc

[Arnold, Curt]

I haven't been following this thread and it troubles me that appears that it would 
require touching every single include of a Xerces header file at least in applications 
(and possibly in the Xerces
code base itself)?

And the problem seems pretty vague, at least to a (primarily) Windows developer.  If 
the problem is a conflict with similarly named include files on *nix, couldn't you 
achieve the same result by
setting up a Xerces directory with symbolic links to all the appropriate 
subdirectories and not need to touch the actual file locations.

Anything that makes it difficult for me to build an app against the Xerces source tree 
or a binary release without code changes, doesn't sound like a good thing.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]