On 13/05/2021 23:13, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Difficult to say if this is an improvement or deliberate breakage.
Technically, it's not a semantic change in the XML output, rather a byte
level change in ignorable whitespace. But I'll need to look into it further
to understand what the best adaptation
Stefan Behnel schrieb am 13.05.21 um 23:13:
> I haven't looked into them in detail yet but will do so as soon as I find
> the time (probably during the next days). It's not possible that lxml is
> doing something here that libxml2 doesn't expect, but we'll see.
Sorry, I meant to write "it's
Jan Tojnar schrieb am 13.05.21 um 21:44:
>> I fail to build libxslt 1.1.34 against it. The "configure" script of
>> libxslt has this line:
>
> libxml2 now behaves more correctly by rejecting invalid arguments like
> `print`. This is fixed in libxslt master so it no longer passes it the
> extra
> I fail to build libxslt 1.1.34 against it. The "configure" script of
> libxslt has this line:
libxml2 now behaves more correctly by rejecting invalid arguments like
`print`. This is fixed in libxslt master so it no longer passes it the
extra print argument.
In the meanwhile, you can use
Salut Daniel,
Daniel Veillard via xml schrieb am 13.05.21 um 15:54:
> P, I am way way behind, but now that CVE-2021-3541 is out I just pushed
> that long awaited release. libxml2 2.9.11 is tagged in git and a signed
> tarball is available at the usual place:
>
>
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 05:52:16PM +0200, Jan Tojnar wrote:
> Hi, trying to build the package from the tarball on NixOS, it appears that
> fuzz/fuzz.h is missing from the archive:
>
> testFuzzer.c:13:10: fatal error: fuzz.h: No such file or directory
> 13 | #include "fuzz.h"
> |
Hi, trying to build the package from the tarball on NixOS, it appears
that fuzz/fuzz.h is missing from the archive:
testFuzzer.c:13:10: fatal error: fuzz.h: No such file or directory
13 | #include "fuzz.h"
| ^~~~
compilation terminated.
It appears to be available in the git