db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: What should I set JAVA_HOME to
Date Fri, 05 May 2006 20:59:35 GMT
I'm not sure I followed this discussion. Forgive me if I'm talking at 
cross-purposes. I have just synced with the mainline and can verify the 
following:

o You still need to set "jdk16" in your ant.properties in order to build 
the JDBC4 support. This is the flag which the build uses to determine 
whether you want to compile JDBC4 support. This is true regardless of 
whether JAVA_HOME points at a 1.4, 1.5, or 1.6 installation.

o The usage of this flag is still documented in BUILDING.txt. Search for 
"jdk16".

Hope I'm not muddling the discussion...
-Rick

David Van Couvering wrote:

> Well, something like
>
> "If you are working with JDBC 4.0, you might want to set JAVA_HOME to 
> the JDK 1.6 install location.  This is not required but is the 
> preferred way to do a build of Derby that includes classes that 
> require the 1.6 compiler"
>
> Also, when I went through BUILDING.txt, I didn't find the section 
> saying how to set the jdk1.6 location in ant.properties (the "old" way 
> of doing this)
>
> David
>
> Andrew McIntyre wrote:
>
>> On 5/5/06, David Van Couvering <David.Vancouvering@sun.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, thank.s  But I am assuming the way moving forward is (once it
>>> becomes GA) to use JDK 1.6 as the JAVA_HOME, right?  Anyway, I'll give
>>> that a shot.
>>
>>
>> Yes, at some point we should probably document that as the preferred
>> setup. But I also think we should continue to maintain the ability to
>> build with previous JDKs until 1.6 is available on most of the
>> platforms of interest outside of the Sun releases, like OS X, HP-UX,
>> AIX, FreeBSD, zOS, etc.
>>
>> I also think that there needs to be some testing of an all-1.6 build.
>> I haven't done any sort of comprehensive testing yet.
>>
>>> I think BUILDING.txt needs to be updated to talk about this.
>>
>>
>> Agreed. Any suggested wording? Otherwise I'll come up with something.
>>
>> andrew
>


Mime
View raw message