Robert Wrote: > > The idea of a dependences directory sounds good. I have not tried > > building the support jars from source yet, but if you would like me to > > I can work on this. > > That would be great.
I built the support jars from source, but this process certainly is ugly. Here are the direct dependencies the support jars have: #ant-contrib. #apache commons-logging. #apache commons-lang. #bcmail -Bouncy Castle Crypto. #bcprov -Bouncy Castle Crypto #JUnit. JUnit can probably be removed if certain build scripts are edited, but then one is placed into the position of having to make the edits each time the dependencies are updated. I installed the above software on my system separate from the jmol spkg but if it is desired to build these dependencies from source too, then they will need to be checked for any dependencies they may have, and so on. Also, since a number of the newly-built jars are later versions than the existing jars, the jmol build.xml file needs to be edited to accommodate them. So how important is it to build the following jmol support jars from source vs. just using the binary versions that come with jmol?: >>> Acme.jar commons-cli-1.0.jar netscape.jar >>> ant-contrib.jar itext-1.4.5.jar vecmath1.2-1.14.jar Since the jmol project uses these binary jars, evidently they do not have very many people complaining about this :-) Ted --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
