db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "David W. Van Couvering" <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Modular build, was: VOTE: Approach for sharing code
Date Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:19:54 GMT
It sounds to me then that it's OK to have the same packages in derby.jar 
and derby-client.jar.  The classes in the common package would get 
loaded from one and only of the jar files.  We just need them in both so 
the client and engine jars can be independent.


Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> Andrew McIntyre wrote:
>>When a jar is sealed, classes cannot be loaded from multiple if the
>>package they are in is sealed. You can unseal specific packages, so
>>that's less of an issue than for signed jars. I believe attempting to
>>load the same class from different jars if the jars are signed will
>>cause a SecurityException, but I'm not well versed in the ins and outs
>>of signed jars.
> I think signing and sealing are independent concepts.
> If a class has been loaded from a signed jar, then it won't be loaded
> again from any jar (within the same class loader), so I don't think
> there can be any exception there.
> A sealed package means that all classes within that package must be
> loaded from the same jar. I assume this is true for a single
> classloader, not across the vm.
> Dan.

View raw message