hi dave,
I'm running a mandrake box with gcc 2.96 or gcc 3.0, I have
successufuly compile xalan with gcc 3.0, with some minor modification (
namespace in one file ).
But build with gcc 2.96 segfault ...
A++
le mer 13-03-2002 � 05:35, David N Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM a �crit :
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I try my best to keep up with the latest Xerces code. The last refresh I
> did was about a week ago, so you shouldn't have a problem building Xalan
> from CVS against Xerces 7.0.
>
> If you're waiting for binary releases, that may take some time. The
> Xalan-C++ team is down to just me, and doing builds and getting the
> distributions prepared is a big job. Of course, if anybody out there is
> interested in helping, feel free to volunteer. In particular, if there's
> someone who has a RedHat 7.2 box with gcc 2.96 on it, I'm looking for a new
> Linux build machine. I promise to be a good citizen if someone can give me
> a login, or if someone wants to do the build themself.
>
> I'm predicting there will be builds available in about 2 weeks, but that
> depends on what my testing against the Xerces 1.7 release reveals.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> "Peter Murphy"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> tsu.com.au> cc: (bcc: David N
>Bertoni/Cambridge/IBM)
> Subject: The old version
>switcheroonie.
> 03/12/2002 06:00
>
> PM
>
> Please respond to
>
> xalan-dev
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> All,
>
> When possible, I use the latest version of Xalan C++ in my development, and
> then the latest version of Xerces C++ that _I think is compatible with it_.
> At the moment it's Xerces C++ 1.6 and Xalan C++ 1.3. However, there come
> times when the Xerces team issue a new version: such as now. The new
> version
> (1.7) is supposed to be faster, with the use of a new IDOM model. I would
> love to use it, but I don't want to break compatibility with Xalan.
>
> In situations like this, what should a developer like myself I do? Wait for
> a new version of Xalan to come out that's _compatible_ with the new version
> of Xerces? Or go for the latest Xerces version and assume it's compatible?
> I
> think I've asked these sort of questions before, and I don't want to bore
> people by repeatedly asking the same thing.
>
> Regards,
> Peter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
