All those look OK to me, Bill -- hmm, good thing I don't use swear words in my scons source dir names! I wasn't expecting to see those in the doc! :-) There's no tool to check; you have to review by hand. Usually the diffs are short like this.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Bill Deegan <[email protected]> wrote: > Did a clean python, libxml2-2.9.2, libxslt-1.28 from source (ran into an > issue with libpython.so from system python causing core dump with got me > stuck for a while because the error you get until you dig into it just > indicates that expat was not built with your python.. blog posting to > follow on that fun). > > Once I sorted expat issue, and run > /home/bdbaddog/tools/python-2.7.10/bin/python bin/docs-update-generated.py > /home/bdbaddog/tools/python-2.7.10/bin/python bin/docs-validate.py > /home/bdbaddog/tools/python-2.7.10/bin/python > bin/docs-create-example-outputs.py > > I get only the following diffs: > M doc/generated/examples/caching_ex-random_1.xml > http://pastebin.com/UwE75eTY > M doc/generated/examples/troubleshoot_explain1_3.xml > http://pastebin.com/3n2f3e4y > M doc/generated/variables.gen > http://pastebin.com/UnhexDVR > M doc/generated/variables.mod > http://pastebin.com/E1nXYupB > > Are these all valid? > Is there an easy way to check them (aka a tool?) > > -Bill > > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:11 AM, William Blevins <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Dirk, >> >> I had lxslt installed but not python-lxslt. Once that was installed it >> was obvious that it switched from lxml to lxml2 usage. I still got another >> error. >> On Jul 31, 2015 3:18 AM, "Dirk Bächle" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Bill, >>> >>> On 30.07.2015 17:36, Bill Deegan wrote: >>> >>>> From the code I've looked at if you have libxml2 & libxslt that is >>>> preferred, and then if not it will use lxml. >>>> >>>> >>> your assumption is correct, this is done because libxml2 is faster in >>> general. >>> >>> It seems that libxml2 and pure lxml have different behaviour regarding >>> "normalizing namespaces" and that's where the diff comes from. This makes >>> at least the validation in the SernaFree XML editor choke for the lxml >>> output...:( >>> >>> I'm investigating this a little further and will try to find a way >>> around this. I'd really like to have the (almost) same output for both XML >>> toolchains, such that it gets accepted by most XML editors out there. >>> >>> @William: You said that after installing an additional package the >>> processing got faster and correct? My guess would be that you now have a >>> lxml distro/package that relies on libxml2 under the hood. This makes the >>> error go away of course... >>> >>> >>> I'll keep you posted, best regards, >>> >>> Dirk >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Scons-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Scons-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Scons-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev > > -- Gary
_______________________________________________ Scons-dev mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
