Approved way of building Excalibur?

[Mark Woon <mo...@SMI.Stanford.EDU>]

With all the changes to the excalibur tree, what's the approved way of
building Excalibur?  Are we still supposed to be using build.sh?  Or
just (my local copy of) ant?

Thanks,
-Mark



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Approved way of building Excalibur?

[Peter Donald <pe...@apache.org>]

On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:00, Mark Woon wrote:
> With all the changes to the excalibur tree, what's the approved way of
> building Excalibur?  Are we still supposed to be using build.sh?  Or
> just (my local copy of) ant?

I never use build.* and if anyone even thinks of making it a requirement I 
will scream ;) So I say just use your vanilla ant (make sure you have xalan 
and junit installed in ant/lib and all should be good).

-- 
Cheers,

Pete

---------------------------------------------
 We shall not cease from exploration, and the 
  end of all our exploring will be to arrive 
 where we started and know the place for the 
        first time -- T.S. Eliot
---------------------------------------------

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: Approved way of building Excalibur?

[Leif Mortenson <le...@tanukisoftware.com>]

As I understand it, we are supposed to be using only Ant.  The build 
scripts got added back in last week,
but I never use them anymore.

Leif

Mark Woon wrote:

>With all the changes to the excalibur tree, what's the approved way of
>building Excalibur?  Are we still supposed to be using build.sh?  Or
>just (my local copy of) ant?
>
>Thanks,
>-Mark
>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>