Re: kaffe + classpath 0.95 (Was: Re: kaffe 1.1.8 (Was: Re: [kaffe] Future directions for Kaffe))

2007-06-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi Dalibor, On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 23:49 +0200, Dalibor Topic wrote: Unfortuntely, there is one VM Interface change that (I assume) makes it hard to support both 0.93 and 0.95 (VMTimezone), so I think we should stay with 0.93 for the 1.1.8 release, and kick out a 1.1.9 s

Re: kaffe + classpath 0.95 (Was: Re: kaffe 1.1.8 (Was: Re: [kaffe] Future directions for Kaffe))

2007-06-14 Thread Dalibor Topic
Dalibor Topic wrote: Dalibor Topic wrote: This seems to work a bit better than I expected. I've just built Classpath 0.95 separately, and then built Kaffe using it [1], and, other than three failing regression tests (nothing really serious, just small changes in expected test output), it works

Re: kaffe + classpath 0.95 (Was: Re: kaffe 1.1.8 (Was: Re: [kaffe] Future directions for Kaffe))

2007-06-14 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi Dalibor, On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 23:49 +0200, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Unfortuntely, there is one VM Interface change that (I assume) makes it > hard to support both 0.93 and 0.95 (VMTimezone), so I think we should > stay with 0.93 for the 1.1.8 release, and kick out a 1.1.9 soon > afterwards. M

kaffe + classpath 0.95 (Was: Re: kaffe 1.1.8 (Was: Re: [kaffe] Future directions for Kaffe))

2007-06-13 Thread Dalibor Topic
Dalibor Topic wrote: Dalibor Topic wrote: Dalibor Topic wrote: D] Remove the merged in GNU Classpath and just use an existing installation I did the lower-half separation (separate build) but not yet change the upper-half to point the location of classpath. Ideas like 'with-classpa