[ANNOUNCE] Xenon-SQL 2.3.5.8 Release

1999-04-04 Thread Peter A. Pilgrim
Xenonsoft, South London, England is very pleased to announce the availability of: Xenon-SQL, the Java based interactive SQL Editor, version 2.3.5. The Personal End User Edition. This software allows you use connect to relational database like MySql, Sybase, and Oracle and

jdk1.2 awt problems

1999-04-04 Thread kiprian
Whenever i try to envoce AWT into my jdk1.2 i get the following error: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: /jdk/jre/lib/i386/libfontmanager.so: libstdc++-libc6.0-1.so.2: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory no mater what i do i cannot fix it. Any i

Pls Help... How to get appletcontext in Japplet ?

1999-04-04 Thread Ferenczi Gyorgy Laszlo
Hy everybody, I'm trying to use getAppletContext in Japplet, it works in the event handlers, but it does not work in the constructor method of the JApplet. Why? Is there any other method to get the (swing) JApplet context? By the way, I just wanna get to another page using this:

Re: Non mofit AWT.

1999-04-04 Thread Michael Emmel
Nigel Gamble wrote: > On Sun, 4 Apr 1999, Michael Emmel wrote: > > The next thing I did was write a driver in Java for the CirrusLogic 5430 and > > got IFC then JFC running on it. > > It wasn't much slower than Swing on top of a Windowing system and this was on > > a fully interpeted. > > I unro

Re: Non mofit AWT.

1999-04-04 Thread Nigel Gamble
On Sun, 4 Apr 1999, Michael Emmel wrote: > The next thing I did was write a driver in Java for the CirrusLogic 5430 and > got IFC then JFC running on it. > It wasn't much slower than Swing on top of a Windowing system and this was on > a fully interpeted. > I unrolled the blit loops and it helped

Re: Curious about glibc 2.1 also... Redhat 6.0?

1999-04-04 Thread John Summerfield
> I'm also curious about the status of the JDK on glibc 2.1 systems. How > hard will it be to make the JDK run with glibc 2.1? Is it easy to keep > a glibc 2.0 around so JDK will run? Does anyone know what glibc Redhat > 6.0 is planning to ship? (Anyone seen 5.9?) I think it's important > that som

Curious about glibc 2.1 also... Redhat 6.0?

1999-04-04 Thread Nelson Minar
I'm also curious about the status of the JDK on glibc 2.1 systems. How hard will it be to make the JDK run with glibc 2.1? Is it easy to keep a glibc 2.0 around so JDK will run? Does anyone know what glibc Redhat 6.0 is planning to ship? (Anyone seen 5.9?) I think it's important that some JDK run

glibc 2.1x Problems?

1999-04-04 Thread Jean-Philippe Couture
Hi. I updated my glibc to 2.1 recently, and noticed that the hole JDK executable were screwed. They do not run anymore under a glibc 2.1x system. Is there any known problem with glibc2.1x and LinuxJDK? Or is it something else that I am doing wrong... becase before the update, all was run

Re: Non mofit AWT.

1999-04-04 Thread Michael K Vance
Jeff Galyan wrote: > It's interesting to me that so many people have found Swing slow, while > my experience has been opposite (I wonder if I have something set up > differently on my system or something...). I do see how it can be slower Build a JFrame, give it a JDesktopPane, and add some JIn

Re: Non mofit AWT.

1999-04-04 Thread Michael Emmel
Jeff Galyan wrote: > AWT on top of Swing sounds pretty interesting... > > Netscape's IFC basically do everything on top of a Panel (faster than > Swing for many uses), so that's another alternative. Way back when I started with the IFC on NeXT's(RIP) Display postscript engine. Then JFC came out

Re: Non mofit AWT.

1999-04-04 Thread Jeff Galyan
It's interesting to me that so many people have found Swing slow, while my experience has been opposite (I wonder if I have something set up differently on my system or something...). I do see how it can be slower than AWT, since it doesn't use any native peers. Swing's slow performance can be att

Re: Non mofit AWT.

1999-04-04 Thread Jeff Galyan
AWT on top of Swing sounds pretty interesting... Netscape's IFC basically do everything on top of a Panel (faster than Swing for many uses), so that's another alternative. --Jeff Michael Emmel wrote: > > Ulli Kortenkamp wrote: > > > > "Jeff" == Jeff Galyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >