Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-08 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Ignacio J. Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió en el mensaje Class.forName will use the system classloader and not the nice little IMHO This contradicts my experience of CLs, i think some places inside tomcat used Class.forName

RE: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Dominique Devienne
I've solved that problem for my own purposes a few months ago, by just hacking a bit at java.c, so it can read it's command line arguments from a file, using the usual @file syntax (that Javac already supports, but implemented in Java). Even enabled env. var. substitutions a la Ant, using the

Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Ignacio J. Ortega
Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió en el mensaje news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, 5 Apr 2003, Ignacio J. Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what i've tried is to create a properties file from gump instead of passing the classpath in the command line, make a Launcher class that loads it

RE: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Dominique Devienne
-Original Message- From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 9:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió en el mensaje news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, 5 Apr 2003

Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Ignacio J. Ortega
Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió en el mensaje news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Ignacio J. Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which also implies that we'll need to go through Ant's codebase and replace all Class.forName() calls (we better do that anyway 8-). I didnt

RE: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Dominique Devienne
for it, that is. Stefan was referring the first form, that takes only a class name. --DD -Original Message- From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 11:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

RE: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Andrew Haley
Dominique Devienne writes: Stefan is *of course* right! Class.forName always uses the system class loader, and not some current loader. No it doesn't. It uses the defining class loader of the caller. http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.1/docs/api/java/lang/Class.html#forName(java.lang.String)

RE: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Dominique Devienne
I stand corrected, and apologize. --DD -Original Message- From: Andrew Haley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 11:53 AM To: Ant Developers List Subject: RE: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations Dominique Devienne writes: Stefan is *of course

Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Ignacio J. Ortega
Costin Manolache [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió en el mensaje news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The problem seems to be that we need a way to pass a CLASSPATH but without using the env variable. And this needs to have the override properties of the CLASSPATH that are used in gump. Well, the problem is the

Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Costin Manolache
Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Ignacio J. Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which also implies that we'll need to go through Ant's codebase and replace all Class.forName() calls (we better do that anyway 8-). I didnt understand this, why? Class.forName will use the system

Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-07 Thread Steve Loughran
- Original Message - From: Costin Manolache [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 11:33 Subject: Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Ignacio J. Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Which

Re: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations

2003-04-06 Thread Steve Loughran
- Original Message - From: Ignacio J. Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2003 08:37 Subject: [Patch] trying solve w2k command line length limitations Hola a todos: I'm trying to solve w2k command line length problems for gump. didnt know there