| How to avoid <antcall > with generic <script > target for subprojects? | How to avoid <antcall > with generic <script > target for subprojects? 2003-03-28 - By Andreas Ames
Andreas Ames <andreas.ames@(protected)> writes:
> - Ant.execute: my current ant version (1.5.1 as packaged on Debian)
> just uses FileUtils.resolveFile to combine the basedir and the name
> of the antfile unconditionally. I would change that to only combine
> them if java.io.File.isAbsolute(antFile) returns false. Otherwise
> I'd leave antFile as it is.
Oops... I just recognized that FileUtils.resolveFile has the
undocumented feature, that it preserves the filename as is, if it is
absolute (but it doesn't use File.isAbsolute to determine this but
rather a method which seems specific to Unices and non-UNC Windows
filenames, but that would be enough for me)
Therefore Ant.execute should do what I want it to do if I specify an
absolute filename for the antfile attribute.
Thus my questions below should have been:
> - Would you consider such a 'feature' for SubAnt to be useful? Would
> the ant maintainers consider it to be useful for the Ant-task? If I
> understand FileUtils.resolveFile correctly, no existing antfiles
> should be broken by this change. But please note that I'm very new
> to ant.
If you, Dominique, would accept my 'feature', no patch against the
Ant-task would be needed. Would the ant maintainers accept the
described behaviour of the antfile attribute of <ant> as officially
suported?
> - Should I send a patch to this list or should I use the bugtracking
> system?
>
> - Against which ant version should I create a patch? Please note that
> I have no access to cvs (firewall issue).
Although I can't access cvs I could make a patch against the HEAD
revision of SubAnt.java if you prefer so (thanks to viewcvs).
TIA and sorry for following up myself,
andreas
|
|
 |
