On 5/7/2014 11:18 AM, Dave Pointon wrote:
... having said that though, with the benefit of a little hindsight
and the application of not a little CM common sense, isn't there a
shortfall in Mercurial in as much as I would expect an update to b73
to remove nashorn as a sub-repo from the forest since it wasn't
present when the tag was created ... or is it me ?
Update to b73 implies you are coming from an earlier build of the JDK 8
forest, where nashorn also does not exist as well. Mercurial doesn't
know of nashorn's existence yet.
If you have a later build of the JDK 8 forest, you are better off with a
new clone, rather than expecting mercurial will downgrade your repos.
I would not want mecurial removing my new repos I've just created within
my forest, if I happen to do a pull from a forest that didn't have my
new repo.
Dave
--
Dave Pointon FIAP MBCS
Now I saw, tho' too late, the folly of beginning a work before we
count the cost and before we we judge rightly of our strength to go
thro' with it - Robinson Crusoe
On 7 May 2014 19:00, Dave Pointon <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanx for the fast response, Dave - reply duly noted and indeed
promulgated :-)
Thanx again ,
--
Dave Pointon FIAP MBCS
Now I saw, tho' too late, the folly of beginning a work before we
count the cost and before we we judge rightly of our strength to
go thro' with it - Robinson Crusoe
On 7 May 2014 18:57, David Katleman <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 5/7/2014 10:18 AM, Dave Pointon wrote:
Greetings fellow builders ,
I have a question, as the subject suggests, regarding the
version of the
nashorn repo - specifically, one of my current tasks is to
attempt to build
OJDK level jdk8-b73 but I can't find that level/tag in the
nashorn repo.
Is there a usual or even standard, method used in OJDK to
establish the
appropriate level of sub-repos ?
nashorn wasn't added to JDK 8 until about b82, so earlier tags
wouldn't be there.
Looks like the creator of nashorn did add some older tags to
the repo to help out in situations like this, but b73 was omitted
In this case, you could use jdk8-b69, and you would get the
same as what you would get for b73, which is nothing, since
nashorn was still empty.
Thanks
Dave
