I couldn't see a ChangeLog.
Jeroen, can you please use text/plain instead of
application/octet-stream? As it stands, mail readers won't display
your patch. You can still use base64 to protect the patch from being
scrambled.
Thanks,
Andrew.
___
Andrew Haley wrote:
I couldn't see a ChangeLog.
I forgot to write it. Sorry.
Jeroen, can you please use text/plain instead of
application/octet-stream?
Is this better?
As it stands, mail readers won't display your patch.
Sorry, Exchange sucks, it insists on using its own mime type
Jeroen Frijters writes:
Andrew Haley wrote:
I couldn't see a ChangeLog.
I forgot to write it. Sorry.
'mkay.
Jeroen, can you please use text/plain instead of
application/octet-stream?
Is this better?
Much.
As it stands, mail readers won't display your patch.
Sorry,
Andrew Haley wrote:
Thanks for the change log. Might it be possible for you to explain
with a few words what this patch does?
See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2004-12/msg1.html
Regards,
Jeroen
___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL
Hi,
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 13:40, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
If nobody objects, this is going in later today.
I am a bit uneasy with this patch since it is not completely clear to me
how the VM is supposed to restrict access to the SystemProperties class.
It is a tricky interaction between the
Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 13:40, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
If nobody objects, this is going in later today.
I am a bit uneasy with this patch since it is not completely
clear to me how the VM is supposed to restrict access to the
SystemProperties class.
It is a tricky
Hi,
On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 22:10, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
Mark Wielaard wrote:
Could you describe how this precisely works?
All untrusted classes are loaded by the system class loader (or some
other trusted class loader that will be responsible for calling
Am Donnerstag, 2. Dezember 2004 16:57 schrieb Jeroen Frijters:
Hi,
I finally got around to it and implemented my idea to move the
system properties out of java.lang.System into a public class in
the gnu.* package.
I'm running IKVM with the attached code with no Mauve regressions
and it
Michael Koch wrote:
Good idea but wouldnt it be better to move all stuff from
SystemProperties to VMSystemProperties to make the system properties
fully customizable ? Perhaps some VM implements want to customize the
properties more, e.g. add additional properties.
I considered that, but
Jeroen writes:
I considered that, but I think it would be nicer if the common
properties stayed in the common code, but I can certainly see some value
in making the division a little more flexible. Maybe we should have an
additional call to VMSystemProperties at the end of the initializer, to
Am Donnerstag, 2. Dezember 2004 17:19 schrieb Jeroen Frijters:
Michael Koch wrote:
Good idea but wouldnt it be better to move all stuff from
SystemProperties to VMSystemProperties to make the system
properties fully customizable ? Perhaps some VM implements want
to customize the
11 matches
Mail list logo
