The build works for me, but I would expect to see some of the executables duplicated in both jre/bin and jdk/bin (java, javaw, keytool, policytool unpack200) and on Windows I only see them in one folder or the other. I'm just building jdktools and not the whole federated build in case that makes a difference.
2008/10/7 Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Mark Hindess wrote: >> I suppose we could manage without changing package names. Initially I >> did it because I wondered if I might end up having a top-level build of >> all the classes much like we do in classlib and it made this slightly >> cleaner. But I hope there is a better way to handle the simpler >> dependencies (common classes needed by both jretools and jdktools). >> >> Now I've committed the split changing the names (again/back) would be >> trivial but I'd like to resolve the following issue first. >> >> We need to decide is if we should have two or three tools jars. (We >> could have one and include the jdktools classes in the jre but I don't >> really like that idea.) >> >> Do we make the jdktools jar depend on the jretools jar to resolve >> the common classes or do we have a separate common tools jar which >> both jdktools or jretools jars depend upon? I was thinking of going >> with just two. (We could have two with no dependencies and keep the >> duplicate classes but I don't like this idea either.) > > Just two JARs for me. The JDK depends upon the JRE in so many other > ways, that this seems quite natural in tools too. I also prefer two jars. > > Regards, > Tim > > -- Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
