libxmlplusplus-general — Open discusions about libXML++

Re: [libxml++] IMPORTANT: libxml++ CVS Repositery is now on GNOME

[Ephraim V. <ef...@ep...>]

> Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've just imported libxml++ to the gnome CVS. From now it is the
> > official repositery of libxml++. I've also updated the homepage to
> > reflect this.
> >
>
> Ephraim, do you have a gnome cvs access ?
>
> Christophe
>
>

Nope. How do I get one?

BTW: the ViewCVS web interface is _so_ much easier than the gnome bonsai
interface...

-eff

Re: [libxml++] IMPORTANT: libxml++ CVS Repositery is now on GNOME

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Christophe de VIENNE wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I've just imported libxml++ to the gnome CVS. From now it is the 
> official repositery of libxml++. I've also updated the homepage to 
> reflect this.
>

Ephraim, do you have a gnome cvs access ?

Christophe

[libxml++] IMPORTANT: Official BugTracker is now Bugzilla

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Hi,

The Official Bugtracker of the libxml++ project is now Gnome Bugzilla.

You can access the bug list at this URL :
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=libxml%2B%2B


The homepage of the project has been updated.


Best Regards,

Christophe

[libxml++] IMPORTANT: libxml++ CVS Repositery is now on GNOME

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Hi all,

I've just imported libxml++ to the gnome CVS. From now it is the 
official repositery of libxml++. I've also updated the homepage to 
reflect this.


Cheers,

Christophe

Re: [libxml++] libxml++ goes 1.0.0

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Ephraim Vider wrote:

>Ok, I updated the win32_msvc directory in CVS.
>
>Note that the new examples will not compile unless the patch I submitted is
>also applied.
>  
>

Ok Thanks.
I've just commited your patch.

I think we can go for a 1.0.0 test2 or rc.


Christophe

[libxml++] [ libxmlplusplus-Patches-862160 ] patch examples to resolve mscv errors

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Patches item #862160, was opened at 2003-12-18 12:17
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=312999&aid=862160&group_id=12999

Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Ephraim Vider (eff7)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: patch examples to resolve mscv errors

Initial Comment:
this patch resolves msvc errors regarding two issues:
a problem in msvc when you have a namespace in 
function qualification.
return statemen in a void function


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=312999&aid=862160&group_id=12999

[libxml++] Re: Problems using libxml++

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Bastian_Pfennigschmidt/CODESCO/DE...@co... wrote:

>
> My application is a kind of plugin for another program, its linked as 
> a dll.
> I have to link against six other libraries.
> In my code I only use the libxml++.
>
>
> If I use write_to_string without formatting I got the output in two 
> lines, the first with the xml tag <?xml ... ?>
> and the rest of the file as a singe line in the second line of the file.
>
> xmlDocument.write_to_file("without_formatting.xml", "UTF-8");
> xmlDocument.write_to_file_formatted("with_formatting.xml, "UTF-8");
>
> (see attachments)
>
>
> Now the formatting is right in with_formatting.xml, but if I parsed it 
> again and save it, you got a document
> like the one I've attached to my second mail.
>

Strange. It looks a bit like if you modified the tree and saved it with 
write_to_file : some formatting whitespaces are still there, some other 
not at all.

Let me know if you solve the problem and what was the reason.

Regards,

Christophe

[libxml++] Re: Problems using libxml++

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Bastian_Pfennigschmidt/CODESCO/DE...@co... wrote:

> <snip>
>
> If I compile the dom_read_write example the output looks fine, even 
> when I use
> write_to_file instead of write_to_file_formatted.
>

It's because formatting is done by inserting whitespaces that are kept 
as text nodes when parsing. So writing it again keep the formatting.

>
> Something get wrong - maybe there are some conflicts with my other 
> libraries.


Do you have other parts of your program using libxml2 without libxml++ ? 
Normaly it shouldn't alterate the behavior of libxml++ with formatting 
but we never know : some settings for formatting are global one and I 
could have missed one when saving the context before the effective writing.
When you lose the formatting of the output, is everything on a single 
line or two, or is it just messed up ?

> So, I think there is no way to get a clean formatted xml output with 
> my project settings.
>
>
> Thanks for help 


Your welcome


Christophe

[libxml++] Re: Problems using libxml++

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Hi

In the code you sent I see only calls to write_to_string, no 
write_to_string_formatted at all. So understanding the formatting 
problem is a bit difficult :-)
It would be better if you could reproduce the problem in a small 
program, possibly based on dom_read_write example.

Regards,

Christophe

Bastian_Pfennigschmidt/CODESCO/DE...@co... wrote:

>
> Here's my class in which I use the libxml++
> Have a look at XMLInit and XMLDeinit
>
> I've updated to the newest available versions of libxml++ and libxml2.
>
> It's compiled as stdcall 2Byte - because of the application in which I 
> use
> the libxml++
> There are no problems with the libxml++ or libxml2 except this 
> formatting problem.
>

[libxml++] Re: Problems using libxml++

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Bastian_Pfennigschmidt/CODESCO/DE...@co... wrote:

> Encoding problem: I thought that the libxml encodes all special 
> characters to entities if I write it to xml, but it seems to be that
> I'm responsible to do that - ok!
>

Yes you are. The easier is to use iconv (which I personnaly wrap into a 
c++ class, making it even easier to use).

> Formatting problem:
>
> Yes, I'm using write_to_file_formatted every time, it's the same with 
> write_to_string_formatted, the formatting was gone after
> parsing and writing the second time.
>

I cannot reproduce this. Please provide an example.
What version of libxml++ and libxml2 do you use ?


Christophe

[libxml++] Re: Problems using libxml++

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Hi,

Bastian_Pfennigschmidt/CODESCO/DE...@co... wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
> I've tried to read and write an XML file using your great library - 
> but I'm running into some problems,
> it would be very nice, if you could give me some code snippets.
>

Did you have a look to the examples ? If you think something important 
is missing in it, just tell us.

> Here are my problems:
>
> 1. When I create an XML using write_to_string or write_to_file and 
> there are special characters, like
> German umlauts, they are not converted into entities. The XML file is 
> UTF-8 encoded.
>
> mXMLParser->get_document()->write_to_string("UTF-8");
>
> When I try to parse the output, I got a parsing error, because the 
> special characters are not valid in UTF-8.
>

Don't forget that in-memory libxml++ encoding is supposed to be UTF-8. 
Any call to a function of the API is waiting for UTF-8 encoded strings. 
So if you gave it ISO-xxx encoded string with special characters this 
probably led to your problem.

>
> And my second problem:
>
> I'm using write_to_file_formatted to get a formated file. If I use 
> write_to_file I get a document with only to lines.
> But if I parse this formatted file again and write it back to file, 
> the formatting are gone (see my attachment).
>

The formatting was gone with write_to_file_formatted ? Or did you use 
write_to_file the second time ?

>
>
> Many thanks for your help
>

Your welcome.

BTW please use the mailing list next time you need help.


Cheers,

Christophe

Re: [libxml++] libxml++ goes 1.0.0

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

OK great. I commited it.

Can I send you the tarball by mail ? and could you put it on your website ?

Thanks,

Christophe

[libxml++] Saxparser segfault?

[Fredrik A. <e97_far@e.kth.se>]

Hi,

I have a problem with the 0.28.0 saxparser segfaulting.
I posted this bug a couple of days ago:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=856191&group_id=12999&atid=112999

I am just curious: Am I the only one having this problem?

-- 
Fredrik Arnerup <e97_far@e.kth.se>

[libxml++] Linking on Darwin

[Olivier B. <olv...@fr...>]

I'm writing a package of libxml++ for fink (a packet manager for OS X). 
Although libxml++ compiled perfectly with the default config files, I 
had strange errors when launching applications that had been linked 
against it.

After a bit of digging around, I found the problem : the final linking 
of libxml++ is made with gcc, which should be, on OS X, used only for 
C.
Recompiling after a "CC=g++ ./configure" solved the problem and 
libxml++ is now fully usable under OS X.

I'm not sure where should I have post this or whether I should file a 
bug/propose a patch for this, but here is the info for what it's 
worth...

Cheers,

Olivier Bonnet

Re: [libxml++] static libio

[christophe b. <chr...@ca...>]

On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 10:23:49AM +0100, Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
> >>>I have not looked at CVS but I expect that you simply changed=20
> >>>lib_LTLIBRARIES to noinst_LTLIBRARIES as I just did. 
> That's indeed what I did. I do the release this morning.

Thanks.

> >Wait before doing what? You mean that I should stop developing my app
> >today and wait a few days? I am new to libxml++ but so far I am very
> >happy with it and 0.27 seems to do what I need.
> There is quite an issue with threading in 0.27. You should really use 
> 0.28 ASAP, ie in a few hours.

I will upgrade today, thanks for the advice (my own bugs in my app are
still covering up).

> >You seem to have something against me 
> I don't think so.
> 
> >(or you distribute 'nonsense', 'dude' to everybody?).
> Yes he does :-)

Thanks for the clarification ;-)

Christophe

-- 
Christophe Barbé <chr...@uf...>
GnuPG FingerPrint: E0F6 FADF 2A5C F072 6AF8  F67A 8F45 2F1E D72C B41E

L'experience, c'est une connerie par jour mais jamais la même.

[libxml++] [ libxmlplusplus-Patches-856247 ] void functions should not return value

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Patches item #856247, was opened at 2003-12-08 16:54
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=312999&aid=856247&group_id=12999

Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Ephraim Vider (eff7)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: void functions should not return value

Initial Comment:
remove return ... from void Document::write_to_file 
functions.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=312999&aid=856247&group_id=12999

Re: [libxml++] autotools problem in 0.27.0?

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Eric Bourque wrote:

>On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 03:52, Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
>  
>
>>It's fixed in the CVS. Unfortunately I couldn't do the 0.28 release 
>>because my home internet connection got cut again. I'll try doing it 
>>from my work today.
>>    
>>
>
>There a change which needs to be made to the spec file now that
>xml++-config, and xml++.m4 have been removed. Could you remove those two
>lines from the %files section of the .spec.in file before releasing
>0.28? If it's not clear, I can send you a patch tomorrow.
>
>  
>

I'll do it this morning. Thanks


Christophe

[libxml++] static libio

[christophe b. <chr...@ca...>]

Hi,

I am working on an updated package for debian (that I want to propose to
the maintainer).
I have a small problem with libio. I need to keep the possibility
to install multiple version of libxml++ but it's no more
straightforward because of libio.

I see three solutions:

1. Install libio with a path that includes the libxml++ soname:
   /usr/lib/libxml++13/libio.*
instead of
   /usr/lib/libio.*

2. Compile statically libio in libxml++

3. Package libio separately. That solution requires that you increase
the soname of libio each time you change the api.

What's your opinion?
I tend to prefer #2. #3 would make sense if other programs are going to
use libio.

Thanks,
Christophe

-- 
Christophe Barbé <chr...@uf...>
GnuPG FingerPrint: E0F6 FADF 2A5C F072 6AF8  F67A 8F45 2F1E D72C B41E

Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler.
-- Albert Einstein

Re: [libxml++] autotools problem in 0.27.0?

[Eric B. <er...@co...>]

On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 03:52, Christophe de VIENNE wrote:
> It's fixed in the CVS. Unfortunately I couldn't do the 0.28 release 
> because my home internet connection got cut again. I'll try doing it 
> from my work today.

There a change which needs to be made to the spec file now that
xml++-config, and xml++.m4 have been removed. Could you remove those two
lines from the %files section of the .spec.in file before releasing
0.28? If it's not clear, I can send you a patch tomorrow.

Cheers,

Eric

Re: [libxml++] autotools problem in 0.27.0?

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Eric Bourque wrote:

>I just grabbed 0.27.0, did a configure, and a make DESTDIR install
>(needed to build rpms), and noticed that libio.a was installed, but
>nothing else in the lib dir. Has anyone else noticed this? The last
>working copy I tried was 0.24.0. I skipped 0.25 and 0.26 so I don't know
>when the problem was introduced.
>
>  
>

Hi Eric,

It's fixed in the CVS. Unfortunately I couldn't do the 0.28 release 
because my home internet connection got cut again. I'll try doing it 
from my work today.

Cheers,

Christophe

[libxml++] autotools problem in 0.27.0?

[Eric B. <er...@co...>]

I just grabbed 0.27.0, did a configure, and a make DESTDIR install
(needed to build rpms), and noticed that libio.a was installed, but
nothing else in the lib dir. Has anyone else noticed this? The last
working copy I tried was 0.24.0. I skipped 0.25 and 0.26 so I don't know
when the problem was introduced.

Cheers,

Eric

Re: [libxml++] sax parser: preserving attributes order

[Christophe de V. <cde...@al...>]

Mur...@Co... wrote:

>>OK. I'll do this and the release this evening.
>>    
>>
>
>A 0.x release or a 1.0 release? We should probably do yet another 0.x
>release because of the API change.
>  
>
A 0.x of course... This one will be 0.18.

>Also, I want to check the 1.0 build file changes myself, but I might not
>have CVS access for the next few days.
>  
>

Don't worry I'll make sure we agree on everything before doing anything 
like a pre 1.0 release.
Is there any special thing you want to be done as a preparation for 1.0 
I can do ? This particularly interest me since this is my first 1.0 
release as a maintainer of project so any advice from you is more than 
welcome.

Cheers,

Christophe

RE: [libxml++] sax parser: preserving attributes order

[<Mur...@Co...>]

> OK. I'll do this and the release this evening.

A 0.x release or a 1.0 release? We should probably do yet another 0.x
release because of the API change.

Also, I want to check the 1.0 build file changes myself, but I might not
have CVS access for the next few days.

Murray Cumming
www.murrayc.com
mu...@us... 

Re: [libxml++] ISO-8859-2 enocdings

[Jonathan W. <co...@co...>]

On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 05:19:53PM +0100, Rainer Stransky wrote:

> Thanks, my error in understanding libxml++/libxml2.
> 
> What is the favourite tool/method/procedure to convert
> C++-strings from ISO-8859-XX to UTF-8 ?

on the command line, iconv(1)
in code, iconv(3)

jon

-- 
"Subvert the dominant paradigm!"
	- The I.O.D.

Re: [libxml++] ISO-8859-2 enocdings

[Rainer S. <Rai...@so...>]

Thanks, my error in understanding libxml++/libxml2.

What is the favourite tool/method/procedure to convert
C++-strings from ISO-8859-XX to UTF-8 ?


Rainer