Re: java 1.1 on linux
On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, peter reilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1.5.1 and 1.5: java.lang.ClassFormatError: Bad major version number I do not get this on an admittedly simple build file using Blackdown's 1.1.8. I.e. Ant 1.5.1 from the binary tar.gz version seems to work with JDK 1.1 for me. This may be fixed by recompiling ant or it may be due to the fact that ant-contrib uses 1.2 isms. Does that mean I should use one of the ant-contrib tasks to reproduce the problem? Maybe the ant-contrib stuff has been compiled with JDK 1.4. Where have you obtained it (self-compiled?)? Stefan
Re: java 1.1 on linux
Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, peter reilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1.5.1 and 1.5: java.lang.ClassFormatError: Bad major version number I thought Magesh had carefully compiled everything with target=1.1 and so on. If this turns out to not work with JDK 1.1, it is another case for those of us proposing to leave JDK 1.1 support behind. This meant our binaries don't work with JDK 1.1 and nobody has complained so far 8-) It's a very good metric. Like how the memory settings for java are broken on the MS JVM (which doesnt understand the -Xm command); its been that way for ages but nobody cares.
Re: java 1.1 on linux
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 05:17 am, Costin Manolache wrote: Ok - last week we had a proposal, discussions on ant-user and ant-dev, and apparently an almost general consensus. What's next ? Should we wait a bit more before making it official by a [VOTE], or just forget the whole thing ? I will propose a vote tonight. I think we are clear that a move to a 1.2 based codebase is desirable. Moving to 1.3 or 1.4 is not yet needed as the features we would make use of are in 1.2 What is less clear to me is whether 1.5 branch should be the last 1.1 codebase or whether it should be 1.6. My preference would be to make it 1.5 since somethings we need to do (i.e. lcp.bat replacement) are best done with a URLClassLoader. 1.6 is still a ways off and if we designate it the last 1.1 release nothing will change for quite a while. I'd like to settle this last aspect before we release 1.5.3 which I think we need to release real soon now. Conor -- Conor MacNeill Blog: http://codefeed.com/blog/
Re: java 1.1 on linux
Conor MacNeill wrote: On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 05:17 am, Costin Manolache wrote: Ok - last week we had a proposal, discussions on ant-user and ant-dev, and apparently an almost general consensus. What's next ? Should we wait a bit more before making it official by a [VOTE], or just forget the whole thing ? I will propose a vote tonight. I think we are clear that a move to a 1.2 based codebase is desirable. Moving to 1.3 or 1.4 is not yet needed as the features we would make use of are in 1.2 What is less clear to me is whether 1.5 branch should be the last 1.1 codebase or whether it should be 1.6. My preference would be to make it 1.5 since somethings we need to do (i.e. lcp.bat replacement) are best done with a URLClassLoader. 1.6 is still a ways off and if we designate it the last 1.1 release nothing will change for quite a while. It seems a pretty strong majority would preffer 1.5 as the last 1.1. I haven't seen any good argument on why 1.6 should support 1.1 - if people don't need the 1.2 features and are coding for 1.1, then they can very well use ant1.5 as well :-) Yes, URLClassLoader is the 1.2 feature that matters the most. Costin
