Adam Heath wrote:
Well, -classpath(jdk), --classpath(gcj).
It appears to me that gcj supports both -classpath and --classpath
equally. It does not support the newer -cp option.
However, gij does not appear to support either option, though it does
support a CLASSPATH environment variable. It also s
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, Per Bothner wrote:
> Adam Heath wrote:
>
> >I have found that, in theory, gcj and gij are compatible, in reality they are
> >not. To be compatable, they *MUST* take *EXACTLY* the same arguments as
> >other
> >standard $(JAVA) and $(JAVAC).
> >
> >I've had to put special code
Adam Heath wrote:
I have found that, in theory, gcj and gij are compatible, in reality they are
not. To be compatable, they *MUST* take *EXACTLY* the same arguments as other
standard $(JAVA) and $(JAVAC).
I've had to put special code into my own build system to switch between
standard jvms and the
Adam Heath wrote:
On 20 Nov 2001, Tom Tromey wrote:
"Ben" == Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is)
should be fixed to provide java-runtime.
Ben> Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on behalf of the
Ben> gcc maintainers not
On 20 Nov 2001, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > "Ben" == Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is)
> >> should be fixed to provide java-runtime.
>
> Ben> Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on behalf of the
> Ben> gcc mainta
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Per Bothner wrote:
> Ben Burton wrote:
>
> >>Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is)
> >>should be fixed to provide java-runtime.
> >>
> >
> >Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on behalf of the gcc
> >maintainers not to provide java-runtime
Adam Heath wrote:
>Well, -classpath(jdk), --classpath(gcj).
>
It appears to me that gcj supports both -classpath and --classpath
equally. It does not support the newer -cp option.
However, gij does not appear to support either option, though it does
support a CLASSPATH environment variable. It
On Wed, 21 Nov 2001, Per Bothner wrote:
> Adam Heath wrote:
>
> >I have found that, in theory, gcj and gij are compatible, in reality they are
> >not. To be compatable, they *MUST* take *EXACTLY* the same arguments as other
> >standard $(JAVA) and $(JAVAC).
> >
> >I've had to put special code in
Adam Heath wrote:
>I have found that, in theory, gcj and gij are compatible, in reality they are
>not. To be compatable, they *MUST* take *EXACTLY* the same arguments as other
>standard $(JAVA) and $(JAVAC).
>
>I've had to put special code into my own build system to switch between
>standard jvm
Adam Heath wrote:
>On 20 Nov 2001, Tom Tromey wrote:
>
>>>"Ben" == Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is)
should be fixed to provide java-runtime.
>>Ben> Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on beh
On 20 Nov 2001, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > "Ben" == Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is)
> >> should be fixed to provide java-runtime.
>
> Ben> Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on behalf of the
> Ben> gcc maint
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001, Per Bothner wrote:
> Ben Burton wrote:
>
> >>Well, the gcj runtimes (libgcj or whatever the package name is)
> >>should be fixed to provide java-runtime.
> >>
> >
> >Oh.. I had figured it was a deliberate decision on behalf of the gcc
> >maintainers not to provide java-runtim
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:41:49AM -0600, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > > Hi. If libgcj2 is going to provide java-virtual-machine, could you
> > > please also provide java1-runtime (as per proposed java policy)?
> >
> > It should only be provided if it contains the java runtime (like
> > classes.zip or
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 11:24:40AM +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Ainsi parlait Tarik Tabani :
> [..]
> Is there anything done to limit spam on this list ? Last time i fired an
> automatic complaint, i get an angry answer from debian mailing-list managers.
I think they have quite a lot of spam
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 03:36:57PM -0600, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> (CCed to debian-java because it relates to the kaffe/testing thread.)
>
> Hi. If libgcj2 is going to provide java-virtual-machine, could you please
> also provide java1-runtime (as per proposed java policy)?
It should only be prov
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 08:41:49AM -0600, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > > Hi. If libgcj2 is going to provide java-virtual-machine, could you
> > > please also provide java1-runtime (as per proposed java policy)?
> >
> > It should only be provided if it contains the java runtime (like
> > classes.zip o
On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 11:24:40AM +0100, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
> Ainsi parlait Tarik Tabani :
> [..]
> Is there anything done to limit spam on this list ? Last time i fired an
> automatic complaint, i get an angry answer from debian mailing-list managers.
I think they have quite a lot of spam
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 03:36:57PM -0600, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> (CCed to debian-java because it relates to the kaffe/testing thread.)
>
> Hi. If libgcj2 is going to provide java-virtual-machine, could you please
> also provide java1-runtime (as per proposed java policy)?
It should only be pro
Ainsi parlait Tarik Tabani :
[..]
Is there anything done to limit spam on this list ? Last time i fired an
automatic complaint, i get an angry answer from debian mailing-list managers.
--
Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG key http://lis.snv.jussieu.fr/~rousse/gpgkey.html
Ainsi parlait Tarik Tabani :
[..]
Is there anything done to limit spam on this list ? Last time i fired an
automatic complaint, i get an angry answer from debian mailing-list managers.
--
Guillaume Rousse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
GPG key http://lis.snv.jussieu.fr/~rousse/gpgkey.html
--
To UNSUBSCR
20 matches
Mail list logo
