Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 ... Last
[#] Fri Nov 07 2008 17:09:20 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's the one thing dos does nicely that unix can't.
And the funny thing is you can do that to a linux fs if you mount it from a windows machine with samba. I do that sometimes because it's handier than that rather lengthy childs play. :-)

[#] Fri Nov 07 2008 17:53:01 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I was reading an article written by Dvorak in 1986, in which he boldly declares that Unix is dead, and IBM's VM is the winning operating system.

Nice to see that some things never change. :)

[#] Fri Nov 07 2008 18:04:36 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

once you get used to the power of those childs play you don't want to narrow your mind again. I must admit i've got some shell macros for half aumotated MP3 renaming

[#] Fri Nov 07 2008 20:59:55 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yeah, it broadens your mind ... kind of like the way you can broaden an egg by striking it with a sledgehammer.

[#] Fri Nov 07 2008 21:12:06 EST from Peter Pulse @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Nice to see that some things never change. :)


Yea, Dvorak's always been an idiot.

[#] Mon Nov 10 2008 04:46:37 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

GOTCHA!

trapped s.b. with sl installed on my box.

 



[#] Mon Nov 10 2008 15:13:39 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

what's sl

[#] Mon Nov 10 2008 19:25:02 EST from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

check it out...

apt-get install sl

 



[#] Thu Nov 20 2008 17:19:07 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

here's a good one for you jokers...
How do I or is it even possible to add a symlink toa jar file?
I know you can do it with tar, and it's the same thing, but I think jar is a little more limited in functionality.
And if you can pull that off, is there a way to do it in ant without a cheese <exec> call?

[#] Thu Nov 20 2008 17:19:17 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

You'll never guess what I'm trying to do...

[#] Thu Nov 20 2008 18:11:04 EST from Bryon Roche @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

.JARS are zip-files, for the fail.

[#] Fri Nov 21 2008 07:28:29 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

yes, I know that, but I still need to get 'jar' to get a symlink into a jar file.

[#] Fri Nov 21 2008 13:18:50 EST from Bryon Roche @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's the blocker, you see. .zip does not support sym or hardlinks.

[#] Fri Nov 21 2008 13:19:57 EST from Bryon Roche @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

What are you trying to do, exactly?

[#] Fri Nov 21 2008 14:14:16 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I am trying to deploy a webapp in the traditional way so that it explodes into its own directory under <webserver>/webapps
The problem is I need the servlets in that web app to foward or include jsps that aren't in that application's context root.
So I want to make a symlink. I can do it after the unzip happens, but it would be neater (if I'm going to make a big bad kludge anyway) to put the symlink in the war file.
But it's not going to work and I have a simpler way anyway. I don't like it as much but it will work.

[#] Sat Nov 22 2008 01:25:09 EST from Bryon Roche @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

it's been forever since i've set up a jsp server.. isn't the canonical way to do that with some sort of verbose url-classname mapping file that's a part of .wars?

[#] Sat Nov 22 2008 01:48:05 EST from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Yes.

And not the canonical way, the ONLY way.

[#] Sat Nov 22 2008 03:21:23 EST from Peter Pulse @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Why bother with ant? What does it get ya exactly?

[#] Sat Nov 22 2008 09:52:33 EST from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


ant does better than Make at handling java dependencies.

[#] Sat Nov 22 2008 18:29:58 EST from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Actually, it does do a few smart things and it's concise, it's not a lot of xml, although like
everybody else I wish I didn't have to use xml.
99% of the errors I get from the ant program are "you didn't clsoe this tag."
xml is for assholes.
But on the good side, you say this:
<war destfile="${warfile}.war" webxml="WebContent/WEB-INF/web.xml" update="true">
<classes dir="build/classes"/>
<classes dir="../servletutils/bin"/>
<classes dir="../utils"/>
<fileset dir="WebContent">
<exclude name="WEB-INF/web.xml"/>
</fileset>
</war>
And it pulls in all the classfiles, all of the html/jsp/js content and it's a lot less stuff than if
you did the jar commands yourself.
Also, the compile is smart, you give it a directory, and it hunts down all the subdirectories looking
for .java files newer than the equivalent class file and builds only what's neccesary:
<target name="compile">
<javac srcdir="src" debug="true" destdir="build/classes" classpath="${cp}" />
</target>
So you don't have to specify everything.
On the downside, it's java, so you have to wait for the vm to start up, but you only have to wait once, whereas multiple steps if you did it yourself would require multiple jvm loads.

And finally the thing that sucks most about ant is this:
http://ant.apache.org/manual/intro.html

Apache happens to know that their shit doesn't stink. I disagree. This sounds like the lamest "not written here" excuse I've ever read.

Go to page: First ... 31 32 33 34 [35] 36 37 38 39 ... Last