Re: Backtrace with jar

2007-06-15 Thread Jörg Sommer
Hallo Andrew, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jörg Sommer writes: > > > is this a bug in java or in the application? > > > Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: getenv > > getenv was deprecated, removed, and then re-added in Java 1.5. > > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?b

Re: Backtrace with jar

2007-06-13 Thread Andrew Haley
Jörg Sommer writes: > is this a bug in java or in the application? > Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: getenv getenv was deprecated, removed, and then re-added in Java 1.5. http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4199068 > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: >

Backtrace with jar

2007-06-13 Thread Jörg Sommer
Hi, is this a bug in java or in the application? % java -jar Puck.jar -ec java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException at java.lang.reflect.Method.invokeNative(Native Method) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:372) at jamvm.java.lang.JarLauncher.main(JarLauncher.java:49) Cause

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-19 Thread Adam Majer
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 10:07:50AM +, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 08:57:17PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote: > > > "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since > > Colin> another bug (#119551) is

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-19 Thread Adam Majer
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 10:07:50AM +, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 08:57:17PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote: > > > "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since > > Colin> another bug (#119551) is

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-19 Thread Colin Watson
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 08:57:17PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote: > > "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since > Colin> another bug (#119551) is holding up freenet-unstable, would > Colin> there be a problem wit

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-19 Thread Colin Watson
On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 08:57:17PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote: > > "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since > Colin> another bug (#119551) is holding up freenet-unstable, would > Colin> there be a problem wi

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-17 Thread Stephen Zander
Gak, hit the wriong key. > "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since Colin> another bug (#119551) is holding up freenet-unstable, would Colin> there be a problem with me making another one? If so, do Colin>

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-17 Thread Stephen Zander
> "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since Colin> another bug (#119551) is holding up freenet-unstable, would Colin> there be a problem with me making another one? If so, do Colin> debian-java think it would

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-17 Thread Colin Watson
re > LexStream::TokenIndex is a typedef for int. I'll try to track this down > some more tomorrow, but in the meantime here's a gdb backtrace. This patch fixes - or at least works around - the problem. While I don't think it's guaranteed by the C(++) standard that sizeof(

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-17 Thread Stephen Zander
Gak, hit the wriong key. > "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since Colin> another bug (#119551) is holding up freenet-unstable, would Colin> there be a problem with me making another one? If so, do Colin

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-17 Thread Stephen Zander
> "Colin" == Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Colin> The last seven uploads of jikes have been NMUs. Since Colin> another bug (#119551) is holding up freenet-unstable, would Colin> there be a problem with me making another one? If so, do Colin> debian-java think it woul

Re: Backtrace

2002-02-17 Thread Colin Watson
re > LexStream::TokenIndex is a typedef for int. I'll try to track this down > some more tomorrow, but in the meantime here's a gdb backtrace. This patch fixes - or at least works around - the problem. While I don't think it's guaranteed by the C(++) standard that sizeof(