Hello Ean,
Thursday, October 9, 2003, 10:26:10 PM, you wrote:
> They often use JAVA_HOME to find the executable, the base class
> libraries,
The base classes shouldn't matter apart from ant bootclasspath,
which is already included in the ant-environment.
> the compiler and jar.
Both are useba
> Sorry I've not been keeping up on the world of Debian java.
I never have been into it really, since I needed JDK 1.4 and didn't find
anything of how to get it officially. This is why I actually went the non
debian way, I guess: Installing JDK and Tomcat manually, not using apt-get,
thus being abl
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 13:46, Dalibor Topic wrote:
> Which only works for those apps that use JAVA_HOME to find the java
> executable to run themselves. Not for the others.
They often use JAVA_HOME to find the executable, the base class
libraries, the compiler and jar. Of course, that presents ano
Hello Dalibor,
Thursday, October 9, 2003, 9:12:38 PM, you wrote:
> Well, yes. But no matter which version they put in, it's always going to
> have bugs, and be a decidedly old version in a year from now. I thought
> there was a documented way to replace the parser implementation using
> system p
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
>> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>Things like -bootclasspath are only used by broken by design
>>>applications, any
Hello Ean,
Thursday, October 9, 2003, 7:33:22 AM, you wrote:
> For instance, if the Tomcat maintainer decides that compiling certain
> baseline classes with GCJ before running the main system with GIJ is a
> good idea then I can't see that findjava will elegantly accomodate that.
> The idea itself
Jan Schulz wrote:
Unfortunately, the Xerces J developers don't want to lose that 'feature'
so the miserable code will stay in, preventing the next release of
Xerces-J from being buildable on any free VM.
Than I'm particulary happy, that eclipse will lose the internal
xerces in the next version
T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Things like -bootclasspath are only used by broken by design
applications, anyway. It's -X*bootclasspath nowadays with Sun's VM, and
it's there for a single reason: debugging. Applic
Hi Ean,
thanks for your quick reply!
Ean Schuessler wrote:
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 12:17, Dalibor Topic wrote:
For example, it seems to be impossible for a non-root user, to overwrite
the java alternative, whereas the proposed scheme allows the user to
specify a different (maybe even working ;)
Hello Dalibor,
Thursday, October 9, 2003, 6:34:56 PM, you wrote:
>> I'm waiting for the screams...
> /me screams: not the same discussion again! ;)
Thanks! :)
[...big snip, complete ACK...]
> Unfortunately, the Xerces J developers don't want to lose that 'feature'
> so the miserable code will st
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Things like -bootclasspath are only used by broken by design
>applications, anyway. It's -X*bootclasspath nowadays with Sun's VM, and
>it's there for a single reason: debugging. Applications have no
>buisi
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 12:17, Dalibor Topic wrote:
> For example, it seems to be impossible for a non-root user, to overwrite
> the java alternative, whereas the proposed scheme allows the user to
> specify a different (maybe even working ;) jvm that he one that comes up
> on top of the alternati
Hello Dalibor,
Replying here, becasue I haven't seen the post from Ean.
Thursday, October 9, 2003, 7:17:19 PM, you wrote:
> the way I understood it, it has little to do with specific tunings, and
> more with giving the application packager a simple, common way to tell
> the user which VMs will w
Ean Schuessler wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 05:11, Daniel Bonniot wrote:
1) Necessity for findjava
I think Jan explained this well in his last message. Package A might
work with kaffe or gij but not sablevm, while package B works with gij
or sablevm but not kaffe. Alternatives cannot handle thi
Hi Jan, hello Ricky,
Jan Schulz wrote:
Hello Ricky,
Wednesday, October 8, 2003, 5:56:22 PM, you wrote:
Well, if the Debian Java policy were modified so that
the command line were rigorously defined (basically
take the output of java -help from the Sun JVM or
elsewhere)
I'm waiting for the scre
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 05:11, Daniel Bonniot wrote:
> 1) Necessity for findjava
>
> I think Jan explained this well in his last message. Package A might
> work with kaffe or gij but not sablevm, while package B works with gij
> or sablevm but not kaffe. Alternatives cannot handle this situation.
On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 11:19, J. R. Westmoreland wrote:
> Could someone please explain to me, I'm currently just a bit confused, why tomcat is
> now is multiple peices?
> Also, what peices do I really need to have? Why does it feel the need to install
> what seems like EVERY java or java-like pack
Could someone please explain to me, I'm currently just a bit confused, why tomcat is
now is multiple peices?
Also, what peices do I really need to have? Why does it feel the need to install what
seems like EVERY java or java-like package?
Does this new scheme require going to apache2 to make it w
18 matches
Mail list logo
