Agreed. This is welcome ammunition for my project to switch to 1.6. :-) Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Patricia Shanahan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Thread.interrupt() vs. class loading You're welcome. I think it is obvious that we should *not* implement the synchronization workaround. We do need to remain aware of the problem, so that we can advise a switch to 1.6 if a user encounters it. Patricia On 11/17/2010 9:22 AM, Christopher Dolan wrote: > Thanks very much, Patricia! I had not realized it was fixed in 1.6 (the > original bug I linked to is still marked open). > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: Patricia Shanahan [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 4:17 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Thread.interrupt() vs. class loading > > On 11/15/2010 12:00 PM, Christopher Dolan wrote: >> Did people know about this Java bug? >> http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4992463 >> It says (and related bugs say) that if you call Thread.interrupt() on > a >> thread that happens to be doing class loading IO at the time, then the >> aborted class with thereafter yield NoClassDefFoundError. > ... > > The TestInterrupt.java program in the bug report runs correctly with the > > JDK 1.6.0_22 java. > > Have you tried your failing case with JDK 1.6? > > As mentioned in the bug report, there is a possible workaround through > synchronization, but it would involve a lot of changes in River. > > Patricia >
