At 08:09 PM 6/27/2010, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>On 28 June 2010 01:05, Michael StJohns wrote:
>> Hi Andrew -
>>
>> I really need to work on fleshing out my emails... :-/
>>
>> The _20 release of the normal (non-OpenJDK) is missing this update. Â I had
>> thought that this fix was supposed to be
On 28 June 2010 01:05, Michael StJohns wrote:
> Hi Andrew -
>
> I really need to work on fleshing out my emails... :-/
>
> The _20 release of the normal (non-OpenJDK) is missing this update. I had
> thought that this fix was supposed to be back-ported to the closed JDK 6
> release. I've got th
Hi Andrew -
I really need to work on fleshing out my emails... :-/
The _20 release of the normal (non-OpenJDK) is missing this update. I had
thought that this fix was supposed to be back-ported to the closed JDK 6
release. I've got the OpenJDK built on my local machine, but the folks I'm
On 27 June 2010 23:45, Michael StJohns wrote:
> PS - I know this is the openjdk list - but I thought this one was getting
> back ported.
>
> Mike
>
>
> At 05:37 PM 6/27/2010, Michael StJohns wrote:
>>Hi guys -
>>
>>I see from the Mercurial logs that this went in to both the jdk6 and jdk7
>>repos
PS - I know this is the openjdk list - but I thought this one was getting back
ported.
Mike
At 05:37 PM 6/27/2010, Michael StJohns wrote:
>Hi guys -
>
>I see from the Mercurial logs that this went in to both the jdk6 and jdk7
>repositories. For jdk6 - it's rev 302 which looks like this should
Hi guys -
I see from the Mercurial logs that this went in to both the jdk6 and jdk7
repositories. For jdk6 - it's rev 302 which looks like this should have ended
up in the _19 release
But all the files in lib/ext/sunpkcs11.jar for _20 are all tagged as 1
September 2009
Is the sunpkcs11.
