Tim Wilkinson wrote:
> Also, has anyone got a legal opinion of using the 1.2 spec form Sun to
> write an independent implementation of the 1.2 additions? I've just
> ordered the latest spec book from A&W and I'll see what that says but I
> believe it's legally scary.
There must be a layer of su
Archie,
If you thinhk that scry you should see what Sun is saying in the Sun v. M$
in court.
Cheers
Tim
On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>
> Tim Wilkinson writes:
> > Just to keep you informed, we just signed a customer who wants RMI
> > implemented so we'll be spending some time on
Tim Wilkinson writes:
> Just to keep you informed, we just signed a customer who wants RMI
> implemented so we'll be spending some time on the RMI implementaiton
> pretty soon to bring NinjaRMI upto the Sun spec. (at least that in the 1.1
> at anyrate).
Cool.. and also cool to hear about java.se
How far is Kaffe from 1.1 compliance? That is my core question.
Thanks,
Duncan
Just to keep you informed, we just signed a customer who wants RMI
implemented so we'll be spending some time on the RMI implementaiton
pretty soon to bring NinjaRMI upto the Sun spec. (at least that in the 1.1
at anyrate).
Also, has anyone got a legal opinion of using the 1.2 spec form Sun to
w
Duncan W. McQueen writes:
> Does anyone out there want to help work on implementing some of the
> Classpath functionality that is not working in Klasses.jar, into Kaffe?
I might be.. I'm currently working on some of the missing JDK1.2 java/util
stuff... also I'm interested in getting started on
Does anyone out there want to help work on implementing some of the
Classpath functionality that is not working in Klasses.jar, into Kaffe?
Thanks,
Duncan
Duncan W. McQueen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Is there any work or synchronization between Classpath and Kaffe? Are
> there things implemented in Classpath that aren't in Kaffe, and the
> same in reverse?
The projects are largely separate. We have agreed to work on a joint
RMI implementatio
Duncan W. McQueen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> But I am concerned with the GPL Kaffe. Is it unfeasible to attempt a
> merge of what Classpath has done into Klasses.jar??
At this point there is not much reason to do that. While I believe
we do have some things written that are not in Kaffe (pr
>>Plus, TVT needs to own the copyright to any files they sell to
>>customers in the custom edition. So unless Classpath was willing
>>to grant this right, TVT would have to rewrite everything anyway.
>>
Classpath is LGPL...Wouldn't it fit in? It's license is freer than
Kaffe's.
>>-Archie
>>
But I am concerned with the GPL Kaffe. Is it unfeasible to attempt a
merge of what Classpath has done into Klasses.jar??
>
>Duncan W. McQueen writes:
>> Is there any work or synchronization between Classpath and Kaffe?
Are
>
>Not really.
>
>> Are there things implemented in Classpath that a
Duncan W. McQueen writes:
> Is there any work or synchronization between Classpath and Kaffe? Are
Not really.
> Are there things implemented in Classpath that aren't in Kaffe, and the
> same in reverse?
Probably (I don't know what's currently implemented in Classpath).
You could argue that
Is there any work or synchronization between Classpath and Kaffe? Are
there things implemented in Classpath that aren't in Kaffe, and the
same in reverse?
Thanks,
Duncan McQueen
>
>
> Hello!
>
> > It looks like your message may be incomplete (or my mailer eat it).
> > In any event, that stuff should "just" work (the build at least).
> > If cygwin/cygwin32 is a problem, we need to either fix config.sub and/or
> > add entries to config.alias.
> >
> > If there's a libt
Hello, Alexandre!
> Has anybody had success with recent snapshots of Kaffe on cygwin?
It works!
With X too.
What about "make check", some modifications are needed.
First of all, classpath should be quoted. make calls /bin/sh, which
interprets $PATHSEP as a command separator.
I've attached a p
15 matches
Mail list logo
