At 21:59 12/18/99 -0700, Jeff Galyan wrote:
>Actually, that makes sense. Java 2 has a different security structure
>than previous releases. If you took away permissions from the jre libs,
>then you'd get that error.
That error makes sense to you because of security being restriced?
HUH? in 1.1 that error had a single, clear, meaning. Why on earth
would it make sense to overlap a completely different type of problem
onto the same error? Why not a *security* error... or is this an
attempt at security through obfuscation? -=Chris
cabbey at home dot net <*> http://members.home.net/cabbey
I want a binary interface to the brain!
Today's opto-mechanical digital interfaces are just too slow!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
