Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > we (ant-dev) just stumbled over a problem with the test-ant project. > > The reason for our problem comes from the fact that Ant's compiled > classes are on the CLASSPATH (as result of a <work> tag) in front of > ant.jar (via <depend>) and the former come without a manifest. In our > special case, I can fix it by removing the <work> in test-ant, it > isn't needed anyway. > > But this led me to look at build.xsl and I found that <work> will > always precede <depend> jars. Why is it that way? Doesn't this defeat > Gump's purpose if I include an old version of something to my module > and point to it with <work> and thus make sure the old version will be > used?
The general assumption is that work directories are initially empty and populated during the course of this build. The way to reference pre-existing jars is to define them as a project and depend on it > What would I break if I reversed the order? I could and will try, but > maybe I'm missing something. I'm not sure. - Sam Ruby -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
