Re: and s

Dominique Devienne wrote: I prefer to keep my build files shorter, as they are already definitely too long. Mine are actually quite small now that I all the common parts from a small set of 'abstract' build files. (and by 'abstract' I mean "meant to imported" as opposed to necessarily having 'abst

Re: and s

Jacob Kjome wrote: I also tend to define a path that is empty, but referenced by one of the other standard paths. That way, I can override that empty path and the pathelements will get included in the standard path by reference. Hopefully that's what you are looking for. Yes it is. Thanks everyone

Re: and s

Dominique Devienne wrote: Yeah, it should work. But I prefer to have a callable/complete common.xml. I guess that strikes me as strange. I've designed at least 3 quite large multiple-build-files Ant builds for mixed C/C++/Java projects using , and the build files I import are never callable directl

Re: and s

Dominique Devienne wrote: Note that by putting the extension classpath before the , and removing the it from common.xml, this works fine, and has the advantage of failing the build is the importing build file does not declare a path with the required ID. But it also makes the common build file inco

Re: and s

Peter Reilly wrote: This will cause the annoying Overriding previous definition of reference to classpath.additional message. Yeah. I already got that when I redefined the path. There is a bug report requesting the reduction of this message to verbose, perhaps this would be a good thing to do! I ag

Re: and s

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: common.xml: --- The "classpath.additional" has to defined in the common.xml because its references there. So basically "classpath" has to be _prepared_ for extension by referencing another path ("classpath.additional") which I can overr

and s

Is there a way to reuse path definitions when using , in a way similar to what you can do with targets? I've a standard path defined in a common build file, which is good for almost all my projects. When I need to change it I'm forced to redefine it completely, even when it would be better to e

Re: FTP Issue

On Monday 14 June 2004 11:17 pm, Steve Cohen wrote: How about commons-net-1.2.1 and ant 1.6.1? I don't THINK commons-net is the problem, but you might as well check. Well, I have the same problem with FTP get and I've done the test you suggest. It doesn't work with commons-net-1.2.1 and ant 1.6.