ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Conor MacNeill" <co...@cognet.com.au>
Subject Re: EjbJar.class in both ant.jar and optional.jar
Date Thu, 28 Dec 2000 05:17:00 GMT
I have fixed this just before my Christmas break. Basically anything that
can be built on the machine doing the building would be included in ant.jar
even if it was in the optional part of the source tree.

In the particular case of ejbjar, the task only requires JDK 1.2+

Whilst it doesn't cause any problems, as you noted, since the classes are
the same, I think it is important to have ant.jar just having the core ant
classes and not the optional bits.

Conor

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nico Seessle" <Nico.Seessle@epost.de>
To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 1:01 AM
Subject: Re: EjbJar.class in both ant.jar and optional.jar


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Jason Rosenberg
  To: ant-user@jakarta.apache.org ; ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
  Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2000 7:29 AM
  Subject: EjbJar.class in both ant.jar and optional.jar


  Any ideas why EjbJar.class appears in both the
  ant.jar and the optional.jar, for the Ant1.2 distribution?

  I can't tell if the files are the same.  They have different
  dates and different compressed sizes, although they do
  have the same de-compressed size.

  Based on the normal ordering in the classpath, with ant.jar
  appearing before optional.jar, the one in ant.jar will be the
  one instantiated, and this is the one with an older timestamp.

  Does anyone care?  Is this an issue of any import?

  jason
Looks like a problem with the buildfile used, but should not be a problem
since both classes should be the same.There are some other tasks (classes)
included in both files, for example Cab.class, javacc/*.class, ...

Nico




Mime
View raw message