On Tue, 09 Sep 2003, Todd Walton wrote: > On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Dan Merillat wrote: > > > Ian, this is why we don't bother submitting JVM bugs. Sun dosn't care. > > I don't know. I thought Sun's reply sounded reasonable. If you want to > report a bug, you have to know what the bug is. All you said to Sun was, > "It crashed. This is the message I got."
"Please report this to SUN" in the crashdump, followed by "fuckoff and make someone without access to the JVM innards debug it" isn't precicely reasonable. There were a few other crashes as well, but they faulted outside the JVM. Meaning that something we do causes 1.4.2 to throw random memory all over the place until it finally gets killed. JVM bugs are like trying to develop code on a buggy CPU. Your code is reasonable, and suddenly the CPU just halts on you. If we want to spend project time(money) trying to design a testsuite for a broken virtual machine and submit it to Sun with a pretty red bow and ask them to PLEASE fix their dammed interpreter, so be it. I'd guess a program with a NIO thread listening and another thread(s?) hitting it with connections as fast as possible the same way we do freenet, and hope that's what it was. I saw the crash in 6176/6177 and not since then. Running -unstable-latest, so 6190 now. 6187 ran then died (OOM) --Dan
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
