On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 04:30, Steve Loughran wrote: > I dont see significant backwards compatibility issues here, unless there is > another aspect of the security manager I am missing. (yes I know about 1.1 > versus 1.2+ issues; we'd have to compile a different SM for each VM and use > reflection to pick the appropriate one at run time)
Some code changes behaviour when a SM is present - regardless of what permissions are assigned or not. In other cases it is a requirement that a SM be installed (and a Policy) prior to the class being loaded for things to work gracefully (ie to have correct permissions assigned to codebase). In other cases the object must be created post policy installation because the constructor will do things like grab the current AccessControllerContext. These things happen for such commonly used classes as URLClassLoader. Which is why I don't think it is an option in ant1.x because we either have to break code due to SM changes or change CLassLoader hierarchy and break code that way ;( -- Cheers, Pete -------------------------------------------------- The fact that nobody understands you doesn't mean you're an artist. -------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
