Can you reproduce it without a security manager?
Can you check if it works with tomcat5.5?
Marcus
pgpMxucWQ4B3G.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
Marcus Better wrote:
Can you reproduce it without a security manager?
Can you check if it works with tomcat5.5?
Marcus
I toggled TOMCAT5_SECURITY to no in /etc/default/tomcat5 and restarted
tomcat5. Now I get similar error.
===
2007-01-14 12:46:19
Maybe following link could help. It is about tomcat 5.5.20, the same
version as Debian tomcat5.5.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41112
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
Apologies for the delay in responding.
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 04:41:09PM +0100, Marcus Better
wrote:
Users don't usually build the package themselves, do they?
And if they do, they are supposed to install the required
build environment. In this case the required dependency
(fastjar) is
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
tag 406780 moreinfo
Bug#406780: tomcat5: NullPointerException on loading FacesServlet (JSF)
There were no tags set.
Tags added: moreinfo
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system
tag 406780 moreinfo
thanks
Maybe following link could help. It is about tomcat 5.5.20, the same
version as Debian tomcat5.5.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41112
Do you think you could try it with an upstream distribution of Tomcat?
Marcus
pgpG9kRCZx8X1.pgp
Description:
Marcus Better wrote:
Do you think you could try it with an upstream distribution of Tomcat?
Marcus
I tried version from unstable, but it doesn't work at all. It doesn't
even leave anything in log files.
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
Hi,
my haploview ITP needs JavaHelp which is distributed as a GPL jar from Sun at
https://javahelp.dev.java.net/.
Has anybody of yours worked on that already? I had a look at the source and it
seems indeed fine. Only the demo files outside the src.jar are licensed
differently (more freely).
ecj-bootstrap_3.2.1-5_m68k.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
ecj-bootstrap-gcj_3.2.1-5_m68k.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
On Sun, Jan 14, 2007, Steffen Moeller wrote:
Has anybody of yours worked on that already?
(The canonical place to avoid work duplication / to reuse work on
Debian packages should be WNPP. :)
--
Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Accepted:
ecj-bootstrap-gcj_3.2.1-5_m68k.deb
to pool/main/e/ecj-bootstrap/ecj-bootstrap-gcj_3.2.1-5_m68k.deb
Override entries for your package:
ecj-bootstrap-gcj_3.2.1-5_m68k.deb - optional devel
Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
___
On Sunday 14 January 2007 22:18, Loïc Minier wrote:
On Sun, Jan 14, 2007, Steffen Moeller wrote:
Has anybody of yours worked on that already?
(The canonical place to avoid work duplication / to reuse work on
Debian packages should be WNPP. :)
Done that, have not found anything, asked
classpath_0.92-4_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
classpath_0.92-4.dsc
classpath_0.92-4.diff.gz
classpath-common_0.92-4_all.deb
classpath-common-unzipped_0.92-4_all.deb
classpath-doc_0.92-4_all.deb
jikes-classpath_0.92-4_all.deb
Accepted:
classpath-common-unzipped_0.92-4_all.deb
to pool/main/c/classpath/classpath-common-unzipped_0.92-4_all.deb
classpath-common_0.92-4_all.deb
to pool/main/c/classpath/classpath-common_0.92-4_all.deb
classpath-doc_0.92-4_all.deb
to pool/main/c/classpath/classpath-doc_0.92-4_all.deb
Your message dated Mon, 15 Jan 2007 07:32:06 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#372851: fixed in classpath 2:0.92-4
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
cacao_0.97-3_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
cacao_0.97-3.dsc
cacao_0.97-3.diff.gz
cacao_0.97-3_i386.deb
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon
___
pkg-java-maintainers mailing list
Your message dated Mon, 15 Jan 2007 07:32:06 +
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#387318: fixed in classpath 2:0.92-4
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now
17 matches
Mail list logo