At Mon, 7 Sep 2015 11:36:38 +0200, Wido den Hollander wrote: > > > On 04-09-15 07:12, Claudio Bley wrote: > > The thing is: the code compiles just fine with an actual Java 7 > > compiler (OpenJDK 1.7.0_85), but not when using a Java 8 compiler > > (OpenJDK 1.8.0_60) with the `-source 1.7` switch. > > > > Ah, indeed. I'm using the Oracle Java 8 JDK and not OpenJDK. > > >> But if the compile issue can be fixed we can probably require at least > >> Java 7. I think Java 6 is dangerous. > > > > I'm still thinking about this. Maybe you're right. But still, the code > > is valid 1.7 source code. Should we prevent that code from compiling > > on Java 7 to protect users from using an obsolete JVM? I don't think > > this is the right place to control that. > > > > we should update the README that it doesn't compile properly on > Oracle's JDK and you should use OpenJDK. But that's not the problem. The problem is that the JDK 1.8 compiler has a different understanding of what valid 1.7 (or 1.6) Java code is in regard to a real 1.7 (or 1.6) compiler. I resolved it differently[1] now and just simplified the code to make the 1.8 and 1.7 compiler happy when specifying a different Java source conformance level than the default of the compiler itself. Regards, Claudio [1]: http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2015-September/msg00413.html -- -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list