From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MLKly-0001YZ-Av for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:36:06 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 02CB4E03B3; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:34:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f211.google.com (mail-ew0-f211.google.com [209.85.219.211]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00C6E03B3 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:34:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy7 with SMTP id 7so4997021ewy.34 for ; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:34:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=masCTtBjSL/PHniJ2ksZLEjB1HkarkHQHxPGIPZrD0M=; b=QZ6wcg/6VxOIeKpjJQJTDm/erMyCE/IAcx7gWYYh4EMfDHz6T5uCa/so3vXvtY+IhD p3PSIVctylcva/PK9IBy8la5u7hV1hMcjzuGprF03v4RucSgUcbXiJpNMzKcOIrOg35m sqXSjsOKWsqGeVPedk/Koq0jJjJ99wnC0mKt8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=MHPL1TPxeiKEvp9u28dHWMPFF4HYSnfXTguaqRFto6uM38LZryVQOwW0hwHClvarpD EPu2FGQSTdg3AzyltDw+WmHpJgCG6gLqxtCB6URGb4HHuVc9q32sndCH+iaQJds787gc rfDWNCsl33tOTzwviZF/IJHoOe/FACT83uH5o= Received: by 10.210.67.4 with SMTP id p4mr2175233eba.21.1246296841057; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:34:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from energy.localnet (energy.heim10.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.197.94]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 6sm12208907ewy.6.2009.06.29.10.34.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:34:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Volker Armin Hemmann To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Java apps in 64 bit JVM? Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:33:56 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.90 (Linux/2.6.30r4; KDE/4.3.60; x86_64; ; ) References: <200906291837.30791.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200906291837.30791.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200906291933.56524.volkerarmin@googlemail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 2e084457-c6f8-45ff-b48c-a624b301217a X-Archives-Hash: c11817171f3a1fdf239cf30aa5a7eb8a On Montag 29 Juni 2009, Alan McKinnon wrote: > Hi all, > > The company has a Juniper Secure Connect VPN and I run amd64. The process > is: log in via a web page in a browser, click a button and the page starts > a java APP to create the ssl tunnel - a full blown Swing app, not a mere > applet. > > I've only ever got this Java app to run in 32 bit Firefox with the > java-x86- emul package. 64 bit Firefox, Konqueror, Opera all fail. I've > tried sun-jdk, sun-jre (nsplugin and nsplugin-2), blackdown and icedtea. > > The only thing that works is firefox-bin with a 32bit jvm. The app doesn't > do much in the way of logging so I don't know why it's failing. This > strikes me as odd: > > A java app is bytecode that is independent of platform. It should make no > difference whether a 32bit or 64bit jvm executes the bytecode as the format > of the Java Virtual Machine and it's bytecode is constant. > > Surely? yes, the bytecode is agnostic. But the vm is not - and look into the directory, tons and tons of old crap. If juniper is badly programmed, it might trigger some bug in the old stuff.