Re: Bug#290377: classpath-common: why don't you provide a jar archive ?

[C. Brian Jones]

On Mon, 2005-01-17 at 07:05, Michael Koch wrote:
> Am Montag, 17. Januar 2005 07:45 schrieb jewel:
> 
> Welcome back, John.
> 
> > Do all classpath VMs have native code to load jar files? Does it
> > make sense to distribute a jar instead?
> 
> The ones the don't have the code to load jars can install classes 
> instead of glibj.zip.
> 
> A JAR is basically a ZIP. There is no advantage when we call it 
> glibj.jar. This will probably get only more problems as people might 
> try to add it to their classpathes because its a JAR.

At some point someone who distributes a binary of glibj might want to
use a jar file format to sign the jar and verify the integrity of the
classes within it.  I don't think this buys you much more than a regular
md5sum of the zip file, but that the runtime can perform the
verification in a standard way.
-- 
Brian Jones <address@hidden>