--- robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 00:18 -0700, Brian Stansberry > wrote: > > --- Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 00:02 -0700, Brian > Stansberry > > <snip> > > > > > 3) Did a little archeology and it looks like > JCL > > > 1.0.1 > > > > was cut about a week before the > AccessController > > > stuff > > > > was added. So that's the last release that > ran on > > > JDK > > > > 1.1. > > > > > > Yep, that's how I read the CVS/SVN logs too. > Version > > > 1.0.2 was JDK1.2 > > > only. > > > > > > There's no information I can find on whether the > > > change to drop JDK 1.1 > > > was deliberate or not.. > > > > For odd reasons (see below) I was reading Bugzilla > > 10825, and in the bug's discussion thread there > are > > comments made just a few weeks before the > > AccessController stuff was added that JDK 1.1.8 > > compatibility was important. > > the loss of support was accidental: i would > definitely have -1'd the > release (which would have sunk it) had i know about > the loss of java 1.1 > support. (at the very least, the numbering rules > mean that it should > have to have been released as JCL 1.1 or JCL 2 > rather than 1.0.2.)
BTW, I forgot to mention this in my earlier comments on running w/ JDK 1.1. For both JCL 1.0.1 and 1.0 the binary download didn't run (got a NoClassDefFoundError looking for LogFactory). I had to rebuild from source to get them to run. I'm *speculating* the binaries were compiled targetting JDK 1.2 and the 1.1 JVM reacted by throwing a NoClassDefFoundError. I know later versions of the JDK give you a message saying they don't understand the class format; maybe 1.1 didn't do that?? I point this out because if we put a note in the wiki saying 1.0.1 and earlier work with JDK 1.1 we should probably be sure the download binaries work :) Brian > > - robert > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
