[Bug 33118] New: Adding bin.base64 attribute causes duplicate datatype attribute
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 Bug #: 33118 Summary: Adding bin.base64 attribute causes duplicate datatype attribute Product: Wine Version: 1.5.22 Platform: x86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: msxml3 AssignedTo: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org ReportedBy: leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com Classification: Unclassified The following psedocode is causing duplicate xmlns to appear on a node. node->Create Attribute (_T("xmlns:dt"), _T("urn:schemas-microsoft-com:datatypes")); node->Put Data Type(_T("bin.base64")); node->Put Node TypedValue("DATA"); Do you get a node that looks like the following. <UML:TaggedValue xmlns:dt="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:datatypes" xmlns:dt="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:datatypes" dt:dt="bin.base64" >... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 --- Comment #1 from Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead(a)gmail.com> 2013-03-04 12:19:15 CST --- This example is too simplified. Could you add a test application or link to a real world application with exact steps to reproduce? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 --- Comment #2 from Alistair Leslie-Hughes <leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com> 2013-03-04 21:20:40 CST --- Created attachment 43805 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=43805 sample test Sample test case. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 Alistair Leslie-Hughes <leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #43805|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #3 from Alistair Leslie-Hughes <leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com> 2013-03-08 16:32:19 CST --- Comment on attachment 43805 --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=43805 sample test Patch is now part of WINE -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 --- Comment #4 from Nikolay Sivov <bunglehead(a)gmail.com> 2013-03-11 06:38:08 CDT --- I think the root of the problem is that our code doesn't care enough that namespace definitions are not element children from libxml2 point of view. It uses separate list to maintain namespaces, that's what xmlNewNs() does for example. As result when you do setAttributeNode() you add a real attribute as a child but no namespace definition is created. Later when you set data type we check for existing namespace definition, it doesn't exist and we create a new one; finally when it dumps node content both definition and attribute are there. It looks like we should really just add namespace definition if "xmlns:ns" kind of attribute is passed to setAttributeNode(), but in this case getAttributeNode() will fail. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 --- Comment #5 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> --- This is your friendly reminder that there has been no bug activity for over 700 days. Is this still an issue in current (1.7.36 or newer) wine? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 --- Comment #6 from Alistair Leslie-Hughes <leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com> --- Confirming still as an issue. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 joaopa <jeremielapuree(a)yahoo.fr> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jeremielapuree(a)yahoo.fr --- Comment #7 from joaopa <jeremielapuree(a)yahoo.fr> --- Does the bug still occur with wine-6.19? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33118 --- Comment #8 from Alistair Leslie-Hughes <leslie_alistair(a)hotmail.com> --- (In reply to joaopa from comment #7)
Does the bug still occur with wine-6.19?
Yes, the testcase still has a a todo_wine on it. https://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/blob/ababea0fd7036ab13ec17d31afbd584c... -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (2)
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org -
WineHQ Bugzilla