/hg/icedtea6: Be verbose wether the NSS-based security provider ...

[Matthias Klose]

On 11.04.2010 22:48, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 10 April 2010 17:23,<doko at icedtea.classpath.org>  wrote:
> If 6763530 is always on now, it should be with the big block of
> patches rather than supplemented afterwards.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here ...

> Just for clarity.
> 6763530 will be in b19 so it's fine to make it default for 1.8 (patch
> has already been removed on the -hg branch).


> I think the ENABLE_NSS output is a little confusing.  I think:
>
>> +if test "x${ENABLE_NSS}" = "xyes"
>> +then
>> +  AC_MSG_RESULT([enabled by default (edit java.security to disable)])
>> +else
>> +  AC_MSG_RESULT([disabled by default (edit java.security to enable)])
>> +fi
>
> would be clearer than including 'yes' in both options (at least it
> would confuse me if I'd passed --disable-nss...)

sure, please feel free to change it. the previous output was even more confusing ;)

   Matthias