To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=90585





------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 11 12:02:53 +0000 
2008 -------
> do you remember whether unoxml "only" complained about an empty XML file or
> were there other assertions as well ?

The were a number of other assertions, something like "< expected", or like
this. Unfortunately, I didn't log them in detail

> in cws xmlfix2 (merged in m18) there were changes to turn error messages from
> libxml2 into assertion failures.

Ah, that explains why the problem did not happen in m17, which made me think
it's really a problem of m18.

> so, is this really a problem in practice, or did you just hit some transient
> issue?

Well, since it was caused by an invalid reply from the update server, I agree
that this is of no practical relevance.


The only thing which is left for me (but which is probably another issue), is
the error message: "Checking for an update failed" is far from being useful for
the user.

But we can probably close this issue here, if all agree. Thanks for your
investigations, and sorry for the noise.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification

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


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

Reply via email to