You're not going to believe what's happening
to me now.someone is doing an experiment on me.I mean an
experiment on a living creature.
it's kind of hard to explain this
situation.
Base: liquid
thing interacting with human body in itself.1. they raise some
koreans(about 20) and put liquid t
> 3. Netscape: The BIG MYSTERY. Why does 4.7x still ship with
> JRE 1.1?!! Who even controls NS nowadays, Time Warner/
> AOL? (Translate as -- who do we bug to get this fixed?)
> Does Sun have some influence with Netscape? If so, why
> do they permit 4.7x to at
David Jardine wrote:
>
> > 2. Drop all Sun-deprecated classes and methods; conform only to the
> >latest non-deprecated version of an API spec
>
> But wouldn't a lot of browsers out there be unable to handle
> some of the "newer" things?
Browsers have been stuck at JRE 1.1 for years. Time t
> "Andrew" == Andrew Pimlott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andrew> seems to forbid both code with native parts, and Java code
Andrew> compiled to machine binaries with gcj. It seems reasonable to
Andrew> me to allow both of these.
Does this really need to be part of the java policy? I thought
> 3. Netscape: The BIG MYSTERY. Why does 4.7x still ship with
> JRE 1.1?!! Who even controls NS nowadays, Time Warner/
> AOL? (Translate as -- who do we bug to get this fixed?)
> Does Sun have some influence with Netscape? If so, why
> do they permit 4.7x to a
David Jardine wrote:
>
> > 2. Drop all Sun-deprecated classes and methods; conform only to the
> >latest non-deprecated version of an API spec
>
> But wouldn't a lot of browsers out there be unable to handle
> some of the "newer" things?
Browsers have been stuck at JRE 1.1 for years. Time
> "Andrew" == Andrew Pimlott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andrew> seems to forbid both code with native parts, and Java code
Andrew> compiled to machine binaries with gcj. It seems reasonable to
Andrew> me to allow both of these.
Does this really need to be part of the java policy? I though
Andrew> Both are shipped as Java bytecode (*.class files, packaged in
Andrew> a *.jar archive) and with an "Architecture: all" since Java
Andrew> bytecode is supposed to be portable.
Andrew> seems to forbid both code with native parts, and Java code
Andrew> compiled to machine binaries with gcj.
On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 09:21:00AM -0500, Rick Lutowski wrote:
> 2. Drop all Sun-deprecated classes and methods; conform only to the
>latest non-deprecated version of an API spec
But wouldn't a lot of browsers out there be unable to handle
some of the "newer" things?
David
--
To UNSUBSCR
Andrew> Both are shipped as Java bytecode (*.class files, packaged in
Andrew> a *.jar archive) and with an "Architecture: all" since Java
Andrew> bytecode is supposed to be portable.
Andrew> seems to forbid both code with native parts, and Java code
Andrew> compiled to machine binaries with gcj.
> "Heiko" == Heiko Garrelts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Heiko> I just want to learn basic Java programming. That means it
Heiko> would be enough to have support for non-gui applications. But I
Heiko> want the package with the most compatibility to the official
Heiko> implementation. The compil
On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 09:21:00AM -0500, Rick Lutowski wrote:
> 2. Drop all Sun-deprecated classes and methods; conform only to the
>latest non-deprecated version of an API spec
But wouldn't a lot of browsers out there be unable to handle
some of the "newer" things?
David
--
To UNSUBSC
On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 02:25:22PM +0100, Geoff Beaumont wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-05-12 at 21:05, Egon Willighagen wrote:
> > On Sunday 12 May 2002 21:32, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > Well. It is even better to remove this paragraph entirelly. It is clearly
> > > stated in the normal debian policy.
> >
> "Heiko" == Heiko Garrelts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Heiko> I just want to learn basic Java programming. That means it
Heiko> would be enough to have support for non-gui applications. But I
Heiko> want the package with the most compatibility to the official
Heiko> implementation. The compi
Jim Pick wrote:
>
> Because the set of Java APIs is so large, trying to develop a set of
> class libraries that works as a drop in replacement for Sun's libraries
> is a very large task. In reality, it's going to be a long time before
> the free java class library projects manage to reimplement 1
On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 09:15:31PM -0700, Jim Pick wrote:
> I think the Debian Java policy, as currently stated, is slightly flawed,
> as it tries to satisfy two goals that aren't completely orthogonal:
>
> 1) To get as much free Java software into Debian as possible, that runs
> without non-
On Sun, 2002-05-12 at 21:05, Egon Willighagen wrote:
> On Sunday 12 May 2002 21:32, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > Well. It is even better to remove this paragraph entirelly. It is clearly
> > stated in the normal debian policy.
>
> True, though in my experience a small reminder now and then helps many
On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 02:25:22PM +0100, Geoff Beaumont wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-05-12 at 21:05, Egon Willighagen wrote:
> > On Sunday 12 May 2002 21:32, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > > Well. It is even better to remove this paragraph entirelly. It is clearly
> > > stated in the normal debian policy.
> >
Jim Pick wrote:
>
> Because the set of Java APIs is so large, trying to develop a set of
> class libraries that works as a drop in replacement for Sun's libraries
> is a very large task. In reality, it's going to be a long time before
> the free java class library projects manage to reimplement
On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 09:15:31PM -0700, Jim Pick wrote:
> I think the Debian Java policy, as currently stated, is slightly flawed,
> as it tries to satisfy two goals that aren't completely orthogonal:
>
> 1) To get as much free Java software into Debian as possible, that runs
> without non
On Sun, 2002-05-12 at 21:05, Egon Willighagen wrote:
> On Sunday 12 May 2002 21:32, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
> > Well. It is even better to remove this paragraph entirelly. It is clearly
> > stated in the normal debian policy.
>
> True, though in my experience a small reminder now and then helps many
> Heiko> I'm both new to Debian and Java. I wanted to learn Java with a
> Heiko> free VM and compiler. But which one should I choose?
>
> It depends on your needs.
I just want to learn basic Java programming. That means it would be enough to
have support for non-gui applications. But I want the p
> Heiko> I'm both new to Debian and Java. I wanted to learn Java with a
> Heiko> free VM and compiler. But which one should I choose?
>
> It depends on your needs.
I just want to learn basic Java programming. That means it would be enough to
have support for non-gui applications. But I want the
On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 06:22:30PM -0700, Jim Pick wrote:
> Sounds like Debian could use the same solution for gcj that Debian uses
> for emacs -> just distribute the .java files and do the ahead-of-time
> compilation (.java to .so) at install time. Is this automatic enough
> under gcj so that thi
On Monday 13 May 2002 03:22, Jim Pick wrote:
> Sounds like Debian could use the same solution for gcj that Debian uses
> for emacs -> just distribute the .java files and do the ahead-of-time
> compilation (.java to .so) at install time. Is this automatic enough
> under gcj so that this could that
25 matches
Mail list logo
