Andrew McIntyre wrote: >On 2/27/06, Kathey Marsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Daniel John Debrunner wrote: >> >> >>>Isn't DERBY-1019 the correct place for this? >>> >>> >>Or perhaps a separate issue created to autoload derbyclient.jar with >>derbytools.jar. I certainly did not glean that impact from the >>DERBY-1019 description. It would be nice to see it as a separate issue. >> >> > >I've filed DERBY-1063 for this. > >With the patch I've attached to DERBY-1063, this is what sysinfo looks >like with 10.2 derbytools.jar and 10.1 derbyclient in the classpath, >but with 10.2 derby.jar and derbyclient.jar in the same location as >the 10.2 derbytools.jar. Kathey, is this output more acceptable? To >me, it indicates that the derbyclient.jar was found first, and reports >its version, but also reports the other derbyclient explicitly added >to the classpath, later. > > > So from what I understand, your patch for DERBY-1063 will reintroduce the DERBY-1045 regression that derbytools will load a different derbyclient.jar than the one specificed by the user CLASSPATH but will improve the sysinfo output . Is that correct? I am really very uncomfortable with anything that requires CLASSPATH ordering or causes one derby installation to affect another, but I'll think about it some more. I'd like to hear what others think. Meanwhile could you say how this would be documented. Maybe that would better help me to understand the impact.
Kathey
