On May 6, 2009, at 9:43 PM, Marcel Weiher wrote:
Nick, thanks for the tip, you set me on the right track. Here is my
new understanding of the problem. In my framework target settings,
the Dynamic Library Install Name is set to:
$(DYLIB_INSTALL_NAME_BASE:standardizepath)/$(EXECUTABLE_PATH)
This is for both Debug and Release. However these expand to
different things for debug and release:
Debug: @executable_path/../Frameworks/libxml.framework/Versions/
2.7.3/libxml
Release: /Frameworks/libxml.framework/Versions/2.7.3/libxml
Is there a particular reason you are embedding a version of libxml
rather than the one that ships with the system ( /usr/lib/
libxml2.dylib )? Does the somewhat newer version have features that
you need or have needed bugfixes?
The system installed version of libxml2 on 10.5.6 is 2.6.16. The
current release of libxml2 is 2.7.3. A quick glance at <http://xmlsoft.org/news.html
> tells us that 2.6.16 comes from November of 2004 and that there
have been dozens of bug, feature, and security fixes in the *nearly
five years* since. The only question is why someone who needed libxml
*wouldn't* embed something more recent than the system provides.
This is another example of Apple's code lagging *severely* behind the
times.
-- Gwynne, Daughter of the Code
"This whole world is an asylum for the incurable."
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
