Re: gcj has a lot of complaints about 8.1-405 release

On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Kris Jurka wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> BTW, one Red Hatter had this to say:
>>
>>> Yeah, AFAIAC this is a bug in ant. Really, the build file should be using
>>> ${java.version} instead of ${ant.java.version} to avoid this problem,
>>> IMHO.
>>> I ran into a similar issue with the Eclipse SDK.
>>
>
> The difference is that java.version will return things like 1.4.2_08 instead
> of just 1.4, so they are not equivalent. ant doesn't offer a lot of tools to
> parse such a string, the best you could do would be a global substring match.
> Trying to find 1.4 would match 1.1.4 as well as 1.4.2 though. Since we don't
> support 1.1 builds we could do this, but it seems a little fragile with
> perhaps other vendors using different format strings. The best solution for
> older ant users might be to duplicate the checks ant makes for
> ant.java.version in our own build file. That way we can put in the latest
> updates and not require an upgrade.

How about java.specification.version? AFAIK, it should do just what we
need.

- Heikki