Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi Archie,
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 04:57 -0500, Archie Cobbs wrote:
After upgradeing JCVM to 0.91, I'm seeing an exception due to broken
static initializer ordering in java.lang.VMClassLoader. The "bootjars"
static field is initialized on line 173, but this is after its use
(
Hi Archie,
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 04:57 -0500, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> After upgradeing JCVM to 0.91, I'm seeing an exception due to broken
> static initializer ordering in java.lang.VMClassLoader. The "bootjars"
> static field is initialized on line 173, but this is after its use
> (indirectly) in t
After upgradeing JCVM to 0.91, I'm seeing an exception due to broken
static initializer ordering in java.lang.VMClassLoader. The "bootjars"
static field is initialized on line 173, but this is after its use
(indirectly) in the static initializer that starts on line 83.
Here's a stack trace:
jav
