Mark Wielaard wrote:
Thanks to you both for working on this issue.
This works for now, but I hope you won't mind if we rip it out again for
0.13. One Thing I don't like about this is that it creates a new compile
time constant which makes it harder to share an GNU Classpath glibj.zip
class byte
Hi,
On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 06:36, Steven Augart wrote:
The actual problem I'm seeing is that (after having done some
rearranging of the sequence in which we run static class initializers),
when I start up my VM, I get a nasty stack trace like this:
Exception in thread Jikes_RVM_Boot_Thread:
Mark Wielaard wrote:
Would/Does the following patch help you out?
2004-11-12 Mark Wielaard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* java/net/URL.java (cache_handlers): Removed field.
(static): Removed block.
(getURLStreamHandler): Don't use cache_handlers anymore.
This looks like a solution
Mark Wielaard wrote:
Would/Does the following patch help you out?
2004-11-12 Mark Wielaard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* java/net/URL.java (cache_handlers): Removed field.
(static): Removed block.
(getURLStreamHandler): Don't use cache_handlers anymore.
Thanks for the attempt. I'm
Steven Augart wrote:
I received a suggestion in private mail from David Holmes (who's been
generous with his time in discussing this with me) that we could
break up the initialization of java.lang.System into two
explicitly-invoked phases, and that a VM could optionally
request that the
Jeroen Frijters wrote:
Steven Augart wrote:
I received a suggestion in private mail from David Holmes (who's been
generous with his time in discussing this with me) that we could
break up the initialization of java.lang.System into two
explicitly-invoked phases, and that a VM could optionally
Steven Augart wrote:
Jeroen Frijters wrote:
Steven Augart wrote:
I received a suggestion in private mail from David Holmes
(who's been
generous with his time in discussing this with me) that we could
break up the initialization of java.lang.System into two
explicitly-invoked phases,
Jeroen Frijters wrote:
Steven Augart wrote:
And, to that end, I have the following small patch that makes
the current Classpath CVS head work with Jikes RVM. If someone
else approves it, I'll commit it.
It works fine for me.
Thanks for looking at it, Jeroen.
I've committed this change to
Hi,
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 17:45, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
Steven Augart wrote:
And, to that end, I have the following small patch that makes
the current Classpath CVS head work with Jikes RVM. If someone
else approves it, I'll commit it.
It works fine for me.
Thanks to you both for
Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 17:45, Jeroen Frijters wrote:
Steven Augart wrote:
And, to that end, I have the following small patch that makes
the current Classpath CVS head work with Jikes RVM. If someone
else approves it, I'll commit it.
It works fine for me.
Thanks to you both
Classpath's java.lang.System was changed yesterday so that
initializing that class now depends upon
VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader() being able to return a working
class loader.
Unfortunately, Jikes RVM's system class loader is based upon
Classpath's java.lang.URLClassLoader.
Steven Augart wrote:
Classpath's java.lang.System was changed yesterday so that
initializing that class now depends upon
VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader() being able to return a working
class loader.
Unfortunately, Jikes RVM's system class loader is based upon
Classpath's
Archie Cobbs wrote:
Steven Augart wrote:
Classpath's java.lang.System was changed yesterday so that
initializing that class now depends upon
VMClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader() being able to return a working
class loader.
Unfortunately, Jikes RVM's system class loader is based upon
Classpath's
13 matches
Mail list logo
