Last modified: 2007-04-27 04:21:43 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 9682 - Warning: simplexml_load_file() expects at most 2 parameters, 3 given in \includes\SpecialVersion.php on line 285
Warning: simplexml_load_file() expects at most 2 parameters, 3 given in \incl...
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
General/Unknown (Other open bugs)
1.10.x
PC Windows XP
: Normal normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-04-24 20:30 UTC by DCLXVI
Modified: 2007-04-27 04:21 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description DCLXVI 2007-04-24 20:30:10 UTC
After a clean installation of mw 1.10-svn, the following warning appears on
Special:Version page:

Special:Version Warning: simplexml_load_file() expects at most 2 parameters, 3
given in \includes\SpecialVersion.php on line 28

* MediaWiki: 1.10alpha
* PHP: 5.0.4 (apache2handler)
* MySQL: 4.1.12 
* OS: Windows XP (XAMPP)
Comment 1 Antoine "hashar" Musso (WMF) 2007-04-26 17:54:10 UTC
simplexml_load_file accept an optional third operator since 5.1.x .
Since this is a rare occurrence (user running mediawiki from svn
with php 5.0.x), I am marking it as WONTFIX.

To solve the problem, upgrade to a 5.1.x php.
Comment 2 Aryeh Gregor (not reading bugmail, please e-mail directly) 2007-04-26 18:06:41 UTC
I thought we were currently avoiding 5.1 dependencies in core code.
Comment 3 Brion Vibber 2007-04-26 18:17:08 UTC
Restored to original version in r21629; unclear why Nick added the 5.1 dependency.
Comment 4 Nick Jenkins 2007-04-27 04:21:43 UTC
The answer is simply that I was not aware that I had added the 5.1 dependency.
My apologies, and thank you for reverting.

I would personally quite like 5.1.0 as the baseline because of entirely separate
reasons (5.0 has some corruption bugs, is unmaintained, has restrictions on the
usefulness of type hinting, etc), but I feel even more strongly that any such
change should be agreed upon, intentional, explicit, announced clearly, and not
affect 1.10 (given the proximity to release).

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links