Instructions for installing Xerces-C++ binary distribution under Windows Vista
appear to be incomplete
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: XERCESC-1848
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1848
Project: Xerces-C++
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Utilities
Environment: Windows Vista
Reporter: Phillip E. Pfeiffer, IV
The package that was being used is xerces-c-3.0.0-x86-windows-vc-9.0 -- but I
suspect that this problem might affect all users of Vista systems who haven't
installed Visual C++, or who have a version of the Visual C++ runtime that's
inconsistent with the ones that were (apparently) used to compile Xerces
distros.
Also, apologies for not being more specific about the platform - but my
Vista-using students (rather than me) are the ones who found this error, and I
suspect this error might affect multiple versions of Vista.
We may have missed something, but the Apache-specified protocols for installing
Xerces binaries under Windows -- which focus mostly on the command path --
aren't adequate for enabling the operation of the precompiled utilities under
some versions of Vista. Students in my XML class who attempted to install
Xerces and run DOMPrint.exe this weekend obtained side-by-side configuration
errors -- a problem that, according to various websites, arises when
dependencies can't be resolved.
One of my students who encountered this problem determined that four additional
files had to be copied to the Xerces bin directory in order to get these
utilities to run: msvcm90.dll, msvcp90.dll, and msvcr90.dll (all from a
subdirectory of C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS), and msvcrt.dll (from C:\WINDOWS\system32).
Apparently, he also had to make sure that he obtain the correct versions of
these files. Finally, he also had to create and place a fifth file,
Microsoft.VC90.CRT.MANIFEST, into the Xerces bin directory, in order to inform
the C++ runtime system to recognize the files. The contents of his MANIFEST is
reproduced below:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<assembly xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1" manifestVersion="1.0">
<noInheritable></noInheritable>
<assemblyIdentity type="win32" name="Microsoft.VC90.CRT"
version="9.0.21022.8" processorArchitecture="x86"
publicKeyToken="1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b"></assemblyIdentity>
<file name="msvcr90.dll" hashalg="SHA1"
hash="e0dcdcbfcb452747da530fae6b000d47c8674671"><asmv2:hash
xmlns:asmv2="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2"
xmlns:dsig="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#";><dsig:Transforms><dsig:Transform
Algorithm="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:HashTransforms.Identity"></dsig:Transform></dsig:Transforms><dsig:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></dsig:DigestMethod><dsig:DigestValue>KSaO8M0iCtPF6YEr79P1dZsnomY=</dsig:DigestValue></asmv2:hash></file>
<file name="msvcp90.dll" hashalg="SHA1"
hash="81efe890e4ef2615c0bb4dda7b94bea177c86ebd"><asmv2:hash
xmlns:asmv2="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2"
xmlns:dsig="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#";><dsig:Transforms><dsig:Transform
Algorithm="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:HashTransforms.Identity"></dsig:Transform></dsig:Transforms><dsig:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></dsig:DigestMethod><dsig:DigestValue>ojDmTgpYMFRKJYkPcM6ckpYkWUU=</dsig:DigestValue></asmv2:hash></file>
<file name="msvcm90.dll" hashalg="SHA1"
hash="5470081b336abd7b82c6387567a661a729483b04"><asmv2:hash
xmlns:asmv2="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v2"
xmlns:dsig="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#";><dsig:Transforms><dsig:Transform
Algorithm="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:HashTransforms.Identity"></dsig:Transform></dsig:Transforms><dsig:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></dsig:DigestMethod><dsig:DigestValue>tVogb8kezDre2mXShlIqpp8ErIg=</dsig:DigestValue></asmv2:hash></file>
</assembly>
I would think the Apache project fix for this problem would involve confirming
the accuracy of this diagnosis and solution, and creating a separate distro for
Windows Vista, with extra documentation and the required manifest (if trying to
distribute the dll's directly would incur copyright issues). I'm guessing
that it would take three days' worth of time to do this carefully.
Apologies if this is a known problem, but I tried searching for "side-by-side
configuration" in Jira, and found nothing.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
