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: What should I set JAVA_HOME to
Date Fri, 05 May 2006 22:10:58 GMT
Very helpful, thanks Rick.

Rick Hillegas wrote:
> 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

View raw message