Re: i2p liberated! [Fwd: GCJ support is on the way]

2005-10-24 Thread Tom Tromey
Andrew == Andrew John Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Andrew On a related note, what are the plans for gcjx? At present, Andrew gcj seems to suffer from the slower development cycles of the Andrew C and C++ compilers. Will gcjx go the same way, or will it Andrew stay more in line with the

Re: i2p liberated! [Fwd: GCJ support is on the way]

2005-10-22 Thread Andrew John Hughes
On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 11:44 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote: The first is a bug in GCJ (or maybe GNU Classpath, haven't tested on Jam or Kaffe yet) - when working with a java.util.Calendar, not all of the fields were being set correctly when they should be: According to Sven, this bug was

Re: i2p liberated! [Fwd: GCJ support is on the way]

2005-10-21 Thread Tom Tromey
The first is a bug in GCJ (or maybe GNU Classpath, haven't tested on Jam or Kaffe yet) - when working with a java.util.Calendar, not all of the fields were being set correctly when they should be: According to Sven, this bug was fixed a while back in Classpath. It wasn't back-ported to

i2p liberated! [Fwd: GCJ support is on the way]

2005-10-20 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi all, Sometimes we can use some moral support. So let me share the following with you all. Normally we are a bit hesitant to recommend people to just switch since we cannot guarantee that everything just works. But we are getting better and better. The following email was just sent to the i2p