Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Thu, 11 May 2006, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
you also changed ForkingJavaRmic to use isFailure() instead of the
exitCode == 0 check that was in it before. If rmic returns 0 on
success on OpenVMS, you've just broken the task.
ooh, good point. Roll back?
That's why I suggested you ask the people from your OpenVMS group -
actually it would be good if at least one of them was subscribed here.
Maybe you've fixed the task and not broken it.
I've been thinking about this whole thing. It comes down to this, (I
believe)
-classic VMS apps have a complex return code logic
-unix has a fairly simple 0 for success, !=0 for failure
-apps that ship with the JDK have the unix model
-java apps have the unix model
Prior to ant1.6, the unix model was all that ant had. so it worked on
all non -VMS platforms, and it worked for java apps
Then we put that patch from the OpenVMS people that said "here is the
logic to handle VMS return codes", with some other stuff for execing
java apps. I don't know where jdk exes fit in here - I think they need
to be given unix rights.
If there are some executables with unix result code logic, and other
bits with VMS rules, then its essentially impossible to "automatically"
make the right decision.
We could switch to unix-policy-everywhere, with a per-<exec> flip to VMS
if you want run VMS-specific apps. My concern there is cvs and SVN: what
kind of exe are they?
-steve
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
