On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 09:02:19PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 18.46 06/02/03 +, you wrote:
> > Re [freenet-support] Re [Free4.ems[Free4.ems <0880.0002>>
> >
> >On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:26:35PM -0800, AARG!Anonymous wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] scriveva:
> >>=20
> >> > >> is happy
Jack D. Ripper:
> If the FreeNet Project wants to support a "free" Java product, GCJ is the
> proper product to support. GCJ (the GNU Compiler for Java) is under active
> development and has re-implemented a number of the more interesting Sun
> libraries, though there is still much to be done. I
On Thursday 06 February 2003 01:02 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It is really impossible to find a trade off
> between new developement and the existing
> features of Kaffe ?
Mostly a matter of Kaffe implementing such an ancient and limited version of
Java that modern Java programmers can't de
At 18.46 06/02/03 +, you wrote:
> Re [freenet-support] Re [Free4.ems[Free4.ems <0880.0002>>
>
>On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:26:35PM -0800, AARG!Anonymous wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] scriveva:
>>=20
>> > >> is happy to run on build 552; it is slow because run on a
>> > >> slow system; the memory
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:26:35PM -0800, AARG!Anonymous wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] scriveva:
>
> > >> is happy to run on build 552; it is slow because run on a
> > >> slow system; the memory profile and resource use of kaffe
> > >> is far better respect sun jre.
> > >> Take care of this compati
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scriveva:
> >> is happy to run on build 552; it is slow because run on a
> >> slow system; the memory profile and resource use of kaffe
> >> is far better respect sun jre.
> >> Take care of this compatibility; IMHO is more important
> >> then that the mean Freenet developer th
