> Besides, it's usually better to specify classpath in the compile command
> rather than in an envar, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with using
Certainly right
> relative paths in the classpath. In fact, relative classpaths are a great way
> to ensure portability of your build script.
If at all you call this a build script how do you ensure portability?
> C:\java\login>javac -classpath WEB-INF\lib\commons-
> beanutils-1.7.0.jar;WEB-INF
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> DK\lib\j2ee.jar;"C:\Program Files\Apache Group\Tomcat 5.5\common\lib
> \servlet-api.jar"
I would certainly not call it a script, I would rather like to set
Environment variable or use ANT script than to type something so messy
every time(In windows once you close command prompt you cant get
the history of commands) or at least use a batch file.
--
Ck
http://www.gfour.net
Lew - 17 Mar 2007 20:03 GMT
Lew <l...@nospam.lewscanon.com> wrote:
>> relative paths in the classpath. In fact, relative classpaths are a great way
>> to ensure portability of your build script.
> If at all you call this a build script how do you ensure portability?
I never called this a build script.
>> C:\java\login>javac -classpath WEB-INF\lib\commons-
>> beanutils-1.7.0.jar;WEB-INF
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> I would certainly not call it a script,
No one would, unless, of course, those commands were issued from a batch file
and what the OP gave us was the echo of that run.
> I would rather like to set Environment variable or use ANT script than to type something so messy
> every time(In windows once you close command prompt you cant get
> the history of commands) or at least use a batch file.
envars are not the way to go unless you only use your computer from one
project. Ant is definitely the way to go.
My use of the term "build script" was meant to be a big, fat hint to the OP
that if they weren't using a build script, they should. The notion that the
original process was not scripted was meant to be highlighted through irony.
Glad you caught it. (Surely you didn't think I was being anything but ironic?)
-- Lew
ck - 18 Mar 2007 21:07 GMT
> My use of the term "build script" was meant to be a big, fat hint to the OP
> that if they weren't using a build script, they should. The notion that the
> original process was not scripted was meant to be highlighted through irony.
> Glad you caught it. (Surely you didn't think I was being anything but ironic?)
>
> -- Lew
LOL, I know probably I over reacted. Thats first symptom of
inexperience.
--
Ck
http://www.gfour.net
Lew - 18 Mar 2007 21:42 GMT
> LOL, I know probably I over reacted. Thats first symptom of
> inexperience.
I'm glad you chuckled. Actually, you deserve credit for spotting exactly what
the issue was.
-- Lew