This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: trying to run Tomcat

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
Cc: Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 15:11:20 +0000
Subject: Re: trying to run Tomcat
References: <43717600.4010309@bothner.com><1131529434.3575.165.camel@localhost.localdomain><43723C96.2060105@bothner.com><1131563220.2855.25.camel@dhcp83-82.boston.redhat.com><437361C1.4040903@bothner.com>

Per Bothner writes:
 > Anthony Green wrote:
 > > On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 10:14 -0800, Per Bothner wrote:
 > >>Shouldn't the Tomcats use gcj regardless of what alternatives
 > >>have been configures - at least as long as it depends on a
 > >>specific alternative?
 > > 
 > > It's not supposed to depend on any specific alternative - although the
 > > current alternative needs to provide the required bits.  AFAIK all 1.4.2
 > > alternatives do.  What alternative did you have selected?
 > 
 > It was a JDK 1.5.x.
 > 
 > I'm a bit surprised.  If the tomcat package (say) installed pre-compiled 
 > classes it would seem like it assumes a specific version of java - and 
 > perhaps a specific version of gcj.

Why?  I don't see why it should.  

Andrew.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: trying to run Tomcat
  - From: Per Bothner

References:
- trying to run Tomcat
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: trying to run Tomcat
  - From: Anthony Green
- Re: trying to run Tomcat
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: trying to run Tomcat
  - From: Anthony Green
- Re: trying to run Tomcat
  - From: Per Bothner

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]