Mohan Embar writes: > Hi Andrew, > > >Very good. I take it the patch we need is > >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q1/msg00672.html > > That is correct. > > >I can't help thinking that life would be much nicer if java.nio and > >java.net had an OS abstraction layer that both used. That way, fixing > >problems like this wouldn't touch common code. > > This approach was discussed at length, but in the end, > Adam Megacz decided against it and instead > recommended forking the Win32 net code and Posix code > completely: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2003-01/msg00093.html Sounds like that's exactly what I'm suggesting. > Michael has forked the Win32 and Posix code at the trunk: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2003-q1/msg00800.html That patch doesn't seem to touch java.nio, which is where the problem we're discussing lies. Andrew.