verify?

Wed Mar 5 00:56:00 GMT 2003

L.S.
Op wo 05-03-2003, om 01:10 schreef Julia Smith:
> Yes, but what's the point of arguing it
None.
> gcj != java is in this case is like saying you want to create a ansi c
True. 
> get angry when people try to compile their code that has include files
I did not get angry. I was making a point. You haven't seen me angry.
> you aren't the individual who's dealing with compiler issues, so why 
True.
> are you replying about this?
Because in a previous mailing you asked on the list how to get Log4J
fixed up. Thus you pointed out that some instructions would be handy.
Thus I reran the compilation at home and made you a source tarball.
That's why I replied:
>> I expected to be able to have this work:

>> gcj -c log4j.jar 

>> A small note on what actually was made to work or how it was done
>>would go a long way.

You said you were experiencing problems while compiling certain sources,
so I just mailed you (off-the-list) what kind of problems I experienced
when I was compiling everything up to tomcat (including Log4J).
> It seems silly to get angry at me about writing docs for something I
As I said, if you got offended: my apologies.
Let's leave at at this. This is getting nowhere. That's the last time
I'll try help somebody with my incapable mind.
-- 
Dhek Bhun Kho <bhun@chello.nl>