On 28/11/2013 3:14 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029292 logged to capture this
enhancement request.
Captured but left to rot in the cell. :( J2SE lives on
David
regards,
Sean.
On 27/11/13 16:36, Joe Darcy wrote:
+1.0!
-Joe
On 11/26/2013 3:01 PM, Mike Du
On 12/02/2013 05:05 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
What I am not 100% sure is whether the 'j2' in those library names is
from "Java 2". The 2 simply could have been a way to avoid naming
clashes. IBM's JDK includes a pkcs11 library named libjpkcs11.so. Also,
pkcs11 support and the libj2pkcs11.so library
On 12/02/2013 04:50 PM, Phil Race wrote:
On 12/2/2013 1:28 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
'j' sounds reasonable to me. However, I'm not really sure if the 'j2'
here is from 'j2se', 'j2re', or 'j2sdk', I would have to ask some
developers who did the original implementation. It could have been
simply t
On 12/2/2013 1:28 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
'j' sounds reasonable to me. However, I'm not really sure if the 'j2'
here is from 'j2se', 'j2re', or 'j2sdk', I would have to ask some
developers who did the original implementation. It could have been
simply to help avoid naming clashes with other
On 11/29/2013 06:47 PM, Omair Majid wrote:
* Sean Mullan [2013-11-27 12:16]:
On 11/27/2013 10:46 AM, Wang Weijun wrote:
What security libs have j2 in their names?
libj2gss.so etc.
Any idea what the compatibility risk of removing the "2" would be?
This seems less prominent because it doesn
* Sean Mullan [2013-11-27 12:16]:
> On 11/27/2013 10:46 AM, Wang Weijun wrote:
> >>What security libs have j2 in their names?
> >
> >libj2gss.so etc.
>
> Any idea what the compatibility risk of removing the "2" would be?
>
> This seems less prominent because it doesn't say "j2se", "j2re" or
> "j
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029292 logged to capture this
enhancement request.
regards,
Sean.
On 27/11/13 16:36, Joe Darcy wrote:
+1.0!
-Joe
On 11/26/2013 3:01 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
Yes please!
Mike
On Nov 26 2013, at 14:49 , mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
Now that we've
On 11/27/2013 10:46 AM, Wang Weijun wrote:
What security libs have j2 in their names?
libj2gss.so etc.
Any idea what the compatibility risk of removing the "2" would be?
This seems less prominent because it doesn't say "j2se", "j2re" or
"j2sdk" but I think it would be fine to rename thes
+1.0!
-Joe
On 11/26/2013 3:01 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
Yes please!
Mike
On Nov 26 2013, at 14:49 , mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
I refer in particular to these directo
2013/11/26 23:33 -0800, sean.mul...@oracle.com:
> On 11/27/2013 03:41 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> The security providers have vestiges of Sun in the provider names (SUN,
>> SunPKCS11, SunJSSE ..) but these are documented and I don't think can be
>> changed (although it not recommended to select serv
2013/11/26 8:29 -0800, david.hol...@oracle.com:
> On 27/11/2013 8:49 AM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
>> Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
>> remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
>
> There are also a bunch of security libs with j2 in their nam
>
> What security libs have j2 in their names?
libj2gss.so etc.
--Max
On 11/27/2013 03:41 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 27/11/2013 00:29, David Holmes wrote:
On 27/11/2013 8:49 AM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
There are also a bunch of secu
On 27/11/2013 00:29, David Holmes wrote:
On 27/11/2013 8:49 AM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
There are also a bunch of security libs with j2 in their names -
should th
On 27/11/2013 8:49 AM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
There are also a bunch of security libs with j2 in their names - should
these be renamed too, or will that cause too
Yes please!
Mike
On Nov 26 2013, at 14:49 , mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
> Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
> remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
>
> I refer in particular to these directories in a typical build:
>
> images/j2re-image
>
Now that we've removed the old build system, can we please now
remove the last vestiges of Sun's pre-Java 5 naming scheme?
I refer in particular to these directories in a typical build:
images/j2re-image
images/j2sdk-image
images/j2sdk-server-image
The "j2" nomenclature hasn't been used si
17 matches
Mail list logo
