Re: [libxml++] patch to allow building without glibmm

[Chris C. <cq...@Cs...>]

Hi,

I will cerainly make use of this. 

I've had issues getting libxml++'s dependancies to build for my 
projects, and have been seriously considering the use of xmlwrap instead 
due to the inconvenience of having glibmm as a dependancy.

Cheers
Chris


>MC> > Also, I wanted to have a clean way to build libxml++ without glibmm
>MC> > and so I've created the attached patch to do it.
>MC> 
>MC> Sounds OK, though I don't think many people will really need it.
>
> One point doesn't make a convincing statistics, but I'm currently
>participating in work on several different projects each of which had
>initially chosen to use xmlwrapp instead of libxml++ just because of this
>dependency. I'd like to use libxml++ instead but there is just no way I'm
>going to make my project depend on GTK+ just because of this (especially as
>there is no real need to use Glib::ustring here apparently)
>

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.