Re: Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-17 Thread Stephen Connolly
On 16 February 2011 23:15, Jesse Glick wrote: > On 02/15/2011 11:35 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: >> >> there are enough people out there who >> use mvn exec:exec to run their swing apps > > Do you mean exec:java? (exec:exec -Dexec.executable="java" would be Yeah... I was using my phone that it

Re: Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-16 Thread Jesse Glick
On 02/15/2011 11:35 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: there are enough people out there who use mvn exec:exec to run their swing apps Do you mean exec:java? (exec:exec -Dexec.executable="java" would be unaffected.) It's not a very good idea to run an arbitrary app this way, since there are plenty of

Re: Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-16 Thread Benson Margulies
That pretty much kills this idea. Too bad AWT doesn't have an *api* for creating a local headless bubble. On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: > stupid phone. stop sending empty messages. > > ok. what i was trying to say us that there are enough people out there who > use mvn

Re: Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-15 Thread Stephen Connolly
stupid phone. stop sending empty messages. ok. what i was trying to say us that there are enough people out there who use mvn exec:exec to run their swing apps - Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of u

Re: Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-15 Thread Stephen Connolly
- Stephen --- Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the screen On 16 Feb 2011 02:53, "Jesse Glick" wrote: > On 02/13/2011 04:54 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: >> It seems to me that it might be

Re: Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-15 Thread Jesse Glick
On 02/13/2011 04:54 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: It seems to me that it might be a legitimate idea for maven itself to just set headless, at least when invoked from the shell. So long as this is done from the CLI entry point classes, or bin/mvn, and not in core classes where it could cause probl

Call System.setProperty("java.awt.headless", true)?

2011-02-13 Thread Benson Margulies
Arguably, if perhaps impractically, maven should run with a security manager that prevented any one plugin from making some global change to the JVM that could have evil effects on other plugin. For example, from making the call in the subject. On the other, it's hard for me to think of a legitima