On Sun, 2003-09-21 at 17:03, Jan Schulz wrote:
> sh. bash in this case, as I have not enough knowledge to make sure
> thats 'sh-only'.
Well, we can count on bash being there so that's ok.
> After having this discussion, because they are not 'similar enough' to
> rely on the alternative system.
On Sun, 2003-09-21 at 17:03, Jan Schulz wrote:
> sh. bash in this case, as I have not enough knowledge to make sure
> thats 'sh-only'.
Well, we can count on bash being there so that's ok.
> After having this discussion, because they are not 'similar enough' to
> rely on the alternative system.
Hallo Ean,
* Ean Schuessler wrote:
>What is findjava going to be written in again? Perl?
sh. bash in this case, as I have not enough knowledge to make sure
thats 'sh-only'.
>I'm still not clear on why we cannot require every VM to provide a more
>specifically detailed version of the JAVA_HOME a
Hallo Ean,
* Ean Schuessler wrote:
>What is findjava going to be written in again? Perl?
sh. bash in this case, as I have not enough knowledge to make sure
thats 'sh-only'.
>I'm still not clear on why we cannot require every VM to provide a more
>specifically detailed version of the JAVA_HOME a
What is findjava going to be written in again? Perl? That would suck if
that's the case. Surely we can find a way to launch a Java language
runtime without using the Perl language runtime.
I'm still not clear on why we cannot require every VM to provide a more
specifically detailed version of the
What is findjava going to be written in again? Perl? That would suck if
that's the case. Surely we can find a way to launch a Java language
runtime without using the Perl language runtime.
I'm still not clear on why we cannot require every VM to provide a more
specifically detailed version of the
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>Hm, this is another 'stupid by design' issue. Sun has specified jni.h but
>hasn't specified the contents of jni_md.h. So it shouldn't be needed to build
>JNI apps. But Sun's jni.h apparently includes jni_md.h without specifying its
>search path. Unfortunately
Title: VumEO NI
Small world! By no means in 1881
at the far side in 1934 feL in 1841 PzDn oqHeCbU To my knoweledge. let's keep the ball rolling!
in 1907 Wait a minute in 1956 Take it easy! in 1993
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>Hm, this is another 'stupid by design' issue. Sun has specified jni.h but
>hasn't specified the contents of jni_md.h. So it shouldn't be needed to build
>JNI apps. But Sun's jni.h apparently includes jni_md.h without specifying its
>search path. Unfortunately
Title: VumEO NI
Small world! By no means in 1881
at the far side in 1934 feL in 1841 PzDn oqHeCbU To my knoweledge. let's keep the ball rolling!
in 1907 Wait a minute in 1956 Take it easy! in 1993
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The 'findjava' algo was described in one of my mail.
> >Hmm, I remember seeing it but I don't remember anyone suggesting that it
> >be made compulsory.
>
> Dalibor argued quire havily for it :)
Yes, I did. I think if debian had a java runtime selec
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The 'findjava' algo was described in one of my mail.
> >Hmm, I remember seeing it but I don't remember anyone suggesting that it
> >be made compulsory.
>
> Dalibor argued quire havily for it :)
Yes, I did. I think if debian had a java runtime selec
12 matches
Mail list logo
