From dev-return-49641-apmail-ant-dev-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org Fri Aug 15 14:00:55 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 85380 invoked by uid 500); 15 Aug 2003 14:00:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 85364 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2003 14:00:54 -0000 Received: from gate.corvil.net (HELO corvil.com) (213.94.219.177) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Aug 2003 14:00:54 -0000 Received: from preilly.local.corvil.com (preilly.local.corvil.com [172.18.1.173]) by corvil.com (8.12.9/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h7FE0s13047570 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:00:54 +0100 (IST) (envelope-from peter.reilly@corvil.com) From: peter reilly Organization: corvil To: Ant Developers List Subject: Re: [Patch] namespace and antlib Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 15:08:02 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200308151206.13533.peter.reilly@corvil.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308151508.02186.peter.reilly@corvil.com> X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Friday 15 August 2003 12:06, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, peter reilly wrote: > > This does not work for the new types of definitions (macrodef, > > presetdef, and scriptdef), so I am thinking of changing this to > > always do the warning (unless they are the same definition as > > reported by the AntTypeDefinition). > > A simple test of whether this is a good idea is a build file with a > at the top-level and a target that contains . You > are not supposed to get a warning when running the antcall. Ah! Thanks, I will try that. In any case I have had another look at the original code, and understand it a little better. I am able to suppress the warning for and by using the original logic. But have ran into issues with the other definitions (i.e. are all the unknown elements the same?, is the script the same etc..) Peter > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org