Vote: yes
(duh)
- Mark
Vote: yes
This is the Open way to work on JDK7 while the JSR(s) are finalized.
Tim
Vote: yes
-Xiomara
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Mark Reinhold has proposed the JDK 7 Project [1].
Should the Build Group sponsor this Project?
Please cast your vote by replying to this message with either
Vote: yes
or
Vote: no
as the first line of the message body.
You may indicate th
Vote: yes
-kto
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Mark Reinhold has proposed the JDK 7 Project [1].
Should the Build Group sponsor this Project?
Please cast your vote by replying to this message with either
Vote: yes
or
Vote: no
as the first line of the message body.
You may indicate the rea
Mark Reinhold has proposed the JDK 7 Project [1].
Should the Build Group sponsor this Project?
Please cast your vote by replying to this message with either
Vote: yes
or
Vote: no
as the first line of the message body.
You may indicate the reason for your decision, if you wish, on
Ben Cheng wrote:
:
:
So the bottom line is if a developer is constrained by the hybrid
32/64-bit environment like I am, it is possible to build 32-bit JDK with
a few makefile hacks.
That is good to know, and thanks for the description as it will benefit the folks who may find
this thread
Sorry for not being clear in the original email. It is not as scary as it
sounds.
All the pre-installed libraries by IT on our x86_64 linux workstations are
32-bit, so I just grab a few extra ones (sound, freetype, ...) as described
on the build-howto page. After that and the makefile hacks, I was
