Hi,
On Saturday 19 March 2005 00:32, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Who do I ask about building a Debian package for JC?
Are you sure you want to manually create rpm and deb packages? There is some
free software called epm that uses just 1 package description to generate
archives for many Unix systems.
Hi,
I'm sorry for the trouble which was caused by the target layer. Actually, I'm
quite surprised about the massive critique now. When we asked to check it in
more than one year ago, there was very little feedback and the feedback we
got was mainly quite positive.
We are currently preparing
Hi all,
a surprising lot of emails have been sent about that matter. It seems that we
all agree on that throwing *something* would be better than what we have
currently. The attached class is a summary of what as far I understood from
the emails most people here wanted.
Personally, I had
Hi Andrew,
On Monday 29 September 2003 19:40, Andrew Haley wrote:
Throwing an appropriate message will help, of course, but one of the
advantages of gcj is that you can pre-link and you know you won't get
runtime linkage errors -- the linker has resolved everything. Having
dummy
Hi Brian,
On Friday 26 September 2003 00:43, Brian Jones wrote:
[NotYetImplementedException]
Not sure we even need the extra exception type, just finding all the
spots to throw the UnsupportedOperationException and doing that would
probably be more than enough.
The motivation is that,
Hi Sascha,
On Friday 26 September 2003 14:38, Sascha Brawer wrote:
[NotYetImplementedException]
What would you say about defining a special Javadoc tag, such as the
following?
/**
* @unimplemented 1.4 Here comes some explanation.
*/
[class|method|field]
Do you mean additionally to
Hi Michael,
On Friday 26 September 2003 17:56, Michael Koch wrote:
I'm for UnsupportedOperationException too because it exists already
and dont have to invent something new.
A reason against using it is that some methods return UOE by design in
some situations. That means that i may not be
On Thursday 17 July 2003 01:52, Brian Jones wrote:
Dr. Torsten Rupp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
class-dependencies.conf
Hmm, got any program to contribute that generates these .conf files?
Not yet, sorry. The files read a bit strange in the beginning, but we wanted
to use standard Java
Hi Mark,
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 12:44, Mark Wielaard wrote:
We don't seem to have real build support for creating JNI header files
but instead have pre-generated .h files in our include file.
Why is that? We do seem to detect which javah like program the user has
installed. On my system it
On Tuesday 15 July 2003 15:36, Dalibor Topic wrote:
- [NotYetImplementedException]
static String nyi =
This method has not yet been implemented in GNU Classpath.\n\n
+ The GNU Classpath project would appreciate receiving
+ an implementation for it.\n
+ If you
On Monday 14 July 2003 14:39, Sascha Brawer wrote:
Mark Wielaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Mon, 14 Jul 2003 00:46:08 +0200:
- Aicas is working on some RMI fixups.
In the context of RMI, maybe not everyone knows that there also exists a
variant which does RMI over IIOP. It uses the CORBA
Hi,
On Sunday 29 June 2003 19:38, Mark Wielaard wrote:
I will be going to The Libre Software Meeting
(http://www.libresoftwaremeeting.org/) on Friday July 11th
and be on LinuxTag on Saterday and Sunday.
I am meeting Dalibor Topic (of kaffe fame) who will also be on both
events.
I can be on
Hi Chris,
On Sunday 10 November 2002 15:57, Chris Gray wrote:
However it still seems to me that GPL+exception excludes the possibility of
binary-only distributions, something which we do not wish to exclude.
Admittedly there seems to be little reason why a systems integrator would
need to
Hi Brian,
On Wednesday 06 November 2002 04:48, Brian Jones wrote:
Someone mentioned they had a method of executing Mauve that would
appropriately time out and kill the bad VM. I'm guessing some use of
expect/tcl here. If there is an example I could look at that would be
great.
We use a
On Tuesday 05 November 2002 00:56, Brian Jones wrote:
Andy, it does not seem like it will be possible to do a complete merge
as originally hoped. Even so, it should be possible to work with you
to include your necessary pieces that provide greater embedded
functionality.
Yes, of course.
On Tuesday 05 November 2002 00:01, Mark Wielaard wrote:
[Rudolph + GNU Classpath]
I meant did you try any of the awt sub-packages not found in Rudolph?
e.g. java.awt.color, java.awt.datatransfer, java.awt.dnd, java.awt.font,
java.awt.geom, java.awt.im, java.awt.im.spi,
Hi,
On Thursday 31 October 2002 22:45, Mark Wielaard wrote:
[Rudolph + GNU Classpath]
Nice. Do you use any of the non-rudolph java.awt.* packages/classes?
No. Sorry if I got that wrong. We use Classpath, except from AWT and
java.lang, and the modified AWT classes from Rudolph. So far, we
Hi,
On Thursday 31 October 2002 12:15, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Has someone actually tried Rudolph with GNU Classpath?
Yes, it is running quite well here. But we replaced many native methods (all
but 5) by Java code. Since Rudolph uses a proprietary interface, this
replacement might be
Hi,
On Monday 28 October 2002 08:52, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
To me, avoiding native methods as often as possible is
preferable as well.
I agree. I'm not using any JNI in my VM for the Classpath native methods
(although my VM does support it [but it isn't completely done yet]), for
one
Hi,
On Sunday 27 October 2002 02:22, Mark Wielaard wrote:
- java/io/Object*Stream.java. We had these classes merged with libgcj
but they are diverging again. This is code I don't know much about and
has some very subtle issues that are easy to get wrong. One thing I like
about the libgcj
Hi Mark,
On Thursday 24 October 2002 18:03, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Wed, 2002-10-23 at 18:21, Andy Walter wrote:
[...] we are very interested in joining your project.
That would be very nice!
I'm glad to see that we are welcome here.
For license questions you will have to contact [EMAIL
On Saturday 26 October 2002 06:22, Brian Jones wrote:
Hey, I guess this answers that nagging question I had about how a JVM
is supposed to deal with native code memory allocation being somewhat
outside of the garbage collector arrangement in use...
:-)
Of course, the garbage collector can not
Hi Mark,
On Saturday 26 October 2002 13:26, Mark Wielaard wrote:
We also want to set something like that up for Kissme (or sablevm or
Orp) and mauve. So that would be a very nice contribution. Then we can
more easily compare what are VM issues and what are library issues. I
have already
On Thursday 24 October 2002 02:53, Brian Jones wrote:
Andy Walter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We're rather free with the CVS access.
Fine.
We haven't spent a great deal of time optimizing the library for speed
or memory usage.
No problem. It is, of course, important to us, so we will invest
Hi Chris,
On Thursday 24 October 2002 09:01, Chris Gray wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Andy Walter wrote:
* One thing that shouldn't be unmentioned: Unlike the rest of our current
standard classes, the AWT implementation is not completely written by
ourselves, but based on Acunia's Wonka
Hello Classpath-Developers,
at aicas GmbH (http://www.aicas.com), we are developing a Java Virtual
Machine, JamaicaVM, that comes with its own (clean room) implementation of
the standard classes. Since this is redundant work (and, as I understand it,
exactely the reason why the GNU Classpath
26 matches
Mail list logo
