From owner-freebsd-java Wed Jan 28 18:13:23 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA21005 for java-outgoing; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 18:13:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gargoyle.bazzle.com (gargoyle.bazzle.com [206.103.246.189]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA20963 for ; Wed, 28 Jan 1998 18:13:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ejc@bazzle.com) Received: (qmail 17500 invoked from network); 29 Jan 1998 02:12:56 -0000 Received: from gargoyle.bazzle.com (206.103.246.189) by gargoyle.bazzle.com with SMTP; 29 Jan 1998 02:12:56 -0000 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 21:12:56 -0500 (EST) From: "Eric J. Chet" To: Nate Williams cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: JDK 1.1.5, FreeBSD 3.0 & CTWM In-Reply-To: <199801282246.PAA06416@mt.sri.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello I just received my permission from sun to download JDK1.1.5. Are there a set of patches for the FreeBSD port? I do have XiG Motif to link a build against. I have been working with Visual Cafe under NT and would like to do more java work under FreeBSD. I just started taking up Java a month ago so it's new to me, but I should be able to help in the bug hunting efforts Thanks, Eric Chet -- ejchet@lucent.com || ejc@bazzle.com On Wed, 28 Jan 1998, Nate Williams wrote: > > good job. > > I didn't do *anything* but build the darn thing. Most of the credit > goes to Damon and Keith who did the Lion's share of the work. > > > I just downloaded it. It seems much more stable on my 2.2.5-stable > > box, but... here's what happened when I was playing with the > > SwingSet demo program : > > I forwarded this onto our port mailing list, but it's also possible that > this is due to a bug in the SwingSet. There are *TONS* of bugs in the > Swing that we provoke on a pretty regular basis, so I wouldn't rule out > it being a swing bug. However, that being said it shouldn't be able to > crash the VM, so hopefully someone will get time to look into this. > > > Nate >