On Saturday 29 July 2006 00:09, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Raif" == Raif S Naffah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Raif> what safe assumptions can we make for non-Eclipse users; e.g. a > Debian Raif> packager who requires the sources as well to patch them when > addressing Raif> security issues (see mail in > Raif> > http://developer.classpath.org/pipermail/classpath/2006-July/001136.html)? > > I don't think there is a problem here. Maybe I'm misunderstanding > though... > > The Classpath javah depends on having an ASM jar file around, both at > build time and at runtime. (I neglected the runtime part in the > wrapper script in yesterday's patch -- I fixed it here.) > > By default Classpath simply won't build javah. If you specify > --with-asm, it will. So all Debian has to do is package ASM and make > it a build dependency of Classpath. This introduces a package cycle, > but distros already have to deal with those all the time... > > The Eclipse-based build is different, I think. It is for developers > really; I doubt any distro would (or could) use that.
indeed. but it would be nice to keep the Eclipse related files (.classpath, and .externalToolBuilders files) common to most, if not all, hackers using Eclipse. one way to do this would be to include the dependent jars (those coming from 3rd-party projects) in a project folder --say external-jars. this way, the Eclipse machinery can always, by default, reference and use the jars in this location. tarring classpath as 2 separate files, one (essential) without this external-jars folder, and the other (optional) comprising solely of that folder --say classpath-external-jars.tar.xxx-- would then give the user flexibility in using and building the project. thoughts? cheers; rsn
pgpWI52vwsNYn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
