Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
On May 26, 2005, at 11:38 PM, Axel Weiß wrote: I have started to add linux support for autoconf. And got it through after two hours only :) Nice Work. If you've got patches, send them along. However, here's an issue with the links in the config directory - on my system, the destination

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Jason E. Stewart
James Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On May 26, 2005, at 11:38 PM, Axel Weiß wrote: I have started to add linux support for autoconf. And got it through after two hours only :) Nice Work. If you've got patches, send them along. Hi James, Cool!! Please commit the linux fixes and I'll

[jira] Commented: (XERCESC-1420) XMLPlatformUtils::makeMutex() creates mutex objects using the C++ runtime heap instead of using a MemoryManager instance

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1420?page=comments#action_66428 ] James Berry commented on XERCESC-1420: -- David, Wow. You have been working hard! I think this looks reasonable. You've basically done three things: - Pass

[jira] Commented: (XERCESC-1348) IGXMLScanner allocates from wrong memory manager

2005-05-27 Thread Christian Will (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1348?page=comments#action_66435 ] Christian Will commented on XERCESC-1348: - Hi Dave, your patch is for xalan and not for xerces. IGXMLScanner allocates from wrong memory manager

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
Hi Axel, On May 27, 2005, at 12:40 AM, Axel Weiß wrote: Hi James, after updating, ./configure and make work out of the box for linux :) Even better! Some questions remain: o shouldn't we check for the presence of wchar.h, as this header is needed by iconv? Am I missing something? I do

Re: Validating XSD(s)

2005-05-27 Thread Gareth Reakes
Hey, Elisha Berns wrote: Gareth, Thanks for the additional comments, it's good to know what the actual developers of a tool think about it! Rather any implementation of the schema specs. Your comments beg the question what other schema standard looks better than XSD at this point, Relax?,

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Alberto Massari
Hi James, I can check how things works with MinGW, and try Windows compilers (Borland, Visual Studio 6, Visual Studio 2003). Alberto At 22.33 26/05/2005 -0700, James Berry wrote: I've been working on the branch https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ xerces/c/branches/jberry/3.0-unstable on a

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Axel Weiß
James Berry wrote: Am I missing something? I do check for wchar.h. Hi James, yes, I overlooked it: you do check it in configure.ac through the symbol AC_CHECK_HEADERS. But this means that we require wchar.h unconditionally on every platform. Are you sure that this header always exists?

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
On May 27, 2005, at 7:17 AM, Alberto Massari wrote: Hi James, I can check how things works with MinGW, and try Windows compilers (Borland, Visual Studio 6, Visual Studio 2003). Alberto Thanks Alberto, You'll note that much of the support you'll need on the Windows side of this is

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
On May 27, 2005, at 7:36 AM, Axel Weiß wrote: James Berry wrote: Am I missing something? I do check for wchar.h. Hi James, yes, I overlooked it: you do check it in configure.ac through the symbol AC_CHECK_HEADERS. But this means that we require wchar.h unconditionally on every

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
Hi Scott, On May 27, 2005, at 7:49 AM, Scott Cantor wrote: - Work on autoconf checks for some of the windows facilities (transcoder, netaccessor, msgloader) While this would be great, I don't see it being too useful since the GNU toolchain doesn't produce makefiles for Windows

RE: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Alberto Massari
Hi Scott, At 10.49 27/05/2005 -0400, Scott Cantor wrote: - Work on autoconf checks for some of the windows facilities (transcoder, netaccessor, msgloader) While this would be great, I don't see it being too useful since the GNU toolchain doesn't produce makefiles for Windows compilers

RE: Fw: Building Xerces 2.3.0 with GCC 3.4.2 on Solaris5.8!!!

2005-05-27 Thread Matthew . Hall1
I am guessing your problem is that your GCC was not compiled with the sparc64 configure option. Try adding -m64 to your CFLAGS and see if this fixes the problem. HTH! Matt -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 10:03 PM To:

RE: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Scott Cantor
I figured cygwin should work like any other autoconf platform. Why am I wrong? No, it does (I assume, at least, I've never done any cygwin builds of my project). I misunderstood. The vast majority of people need a native build, so I assumed that's what was meant here and was hoping I'd be

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
Hi Axel, On May 27, 2005, at 7:36 AM, Axel Weiß wrote: yes, I overlooked it: you do check it in configure.ac through the symbol AC_CHECK_HEADERS. But this means that we require wchar.h unconditionally on every platform. Are you sure that this header always exists? I re-read this and

RE: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Scott Cantor
http://www.pcug.org.au/~millerp/rmch/recu-make-cons-harm.html Taken in by those arguments, I've gone for the monolithic make in large part. There are separate makefiles for obj, src, tests. Some of those arguments don't really seem to hold that much with an autotools-driven build.

[jira] Commented: (XERCESC-1420) XMLPlatformUtils::makeMutex() creates mutex objects using the C++ runtime heap instead of using a MemoryManager instance

2005-05-27 Thread David Bertoni (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1420?page=comments#action_66470 ] David Bertoni commented on XERCESC-1420: I can certainly generalize it, since we could probably use it for other things -- good idea! As far as castTo()

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
Hi Scott, On May 27, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Scott Cantor wrote: http://www.pcug.org.au/~millerp/rmch/recu-make-cons-harm.html Taken in by those arguments, I've gone for the monolithic make in large part. There are separate makefiles for obj, src, tests. Some of those arguments don't really

[jira] Updated: (XERCESC-1348) IGXMLScanner allocates from wrong memory manager

2005-05-27 Thread David Bertoni (JIRA)
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1348?page=all ] David Bertoni updated XERCESC-1348: --- Attachment: patch.txt OK, I hope I got the patch right this time! IGXMLScanner allocates from wrong memory manager

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Jeroen N. Witmond
I threw a switch last night that causes all the .o files to end up at the root of the make (src, for instance) rather than alongside their src files. After continually stumbing over the .o files in the source directory, I decided this was better behavior. There are no conflicts that I know of

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread James Berry
On May 26, 2005, at 11:47 PM, Jason E. Stewart wrote: Hi James, Cool!! Please commit the linux fixes and I'll test it out with Xerces-P. Hi Jason, The latest from Axel (thanks Axel!) is that it was running on Linux, at least some linux. I'd love to hear what you think. Test away, test

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Jason E. Stewart
Axel Weiß [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Besides the danger of accidentially having object files be overwritten, if they have identical names and their sources in different subdirs, it's just unaesthetic to have all the object files lying around in an unstructured way. Don't you agree, that it

Re: Xerces 3.0 autoconf/reorg progress update

2005-05-27 Thread Jason E. Stewart
Scott Cantor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://www.pcug.org.au/~millerp/rmch/recu-make-cons-harm.html Taken in by those arguments, I've gone for the monolithic make in large part. There are separate makefiles for obj, src, tests. Some of those arguments don't really seem to hold that