Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Jerry Stuckle Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Using jar inside a jar Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 17:02:17 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 54 Message-ID: References: <871tmn6qh9.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <87r3un58co.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> <9hqb8wxcdlei$.z1cgb05uf3hv$.dlg@40tude.net> <8k8yahcsg1j8$.o5hkd2bta9p1$.dlg@40tude.net> <1gv0s2dwyrhig$.1xbh0tkzetk7s$.dlg@40tude.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 22:01:47 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3088393e34bc61b3e6a923d0c81ae1e3"; logging-data="1102"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/UmHSThjyvJ3lVrCaExKsj4naQGeQvW/U=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 In-Reply-To: <1gv0s2dwyrhig$.1xbh0tkzetk7s$.dlg@40tude.net> Cancel-Lock: sha1:cwRbxJJifS6+4+ZGeSdYOr7legY= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:30827 On 1/23/2015 4:42 PM, Joerg Meier wrote: > On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:46:21 +0000, Nigel Wade wrote: > >> On 23/01/15 12:12, Joerg Meier wrote: >>> On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:10:35 +0000, Nigel Wade wrote: >>>> I'm not a fan of the "big jar" concept. I much prefer to keep libraries in separate jar's. If a library class gets >>>> updated it's only need to update a single library jar, rather than every "big jar" which contains that class. >>> Different areas, I'd say. For end users you almost never would want them to >>> update libraries on their own, unless your end users are developers. >> Why not? End user, or system admin. I'd still not supply a "big bundled jar" unless there was a specific requirement to >> do so. > >> When you get updates from Microsoft do you get a few small patched libraries, or GB's of statically linked applications >> each time? > > Depends on who provides the libraries. If it's third parties, like is the > case for most Java libraries, then I most certainly get them with each app > that uses them. If it's .NET, like the JRE, I tend to not get them bundled > other than a few exceptional cases. > > Nobody guarantees you that newer versions of open source libraries will > behave 100% the same as the one you dev against. > > Honestly, short of .NET, DirectX, OpenGL and similar giants, I know of no > library for Windows that isn't delivered along with the app that needs it. > I honestly can't remember the last time an installer said "To run this you > need to manually install library so and so", again, other than above > behemoths. > > Do you and me live in different realities or do I misunderstand you ? > > Liebe Gruesse, > Joerg > Joerg, Back in the days before .NET, you often had to load the Visual C++ or Visual Basic runtime (free downloads from MS) to run applications created with either one, respectively. But in general, unless it was something specified by MS or similar, as you note, Windows applications are generally self-contained. Unlike on Linux, where you often need to compile code to run on your system, and almost always need libraries from other products, including the compiler. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ==================