Simo Sorce wrote:
I think I've missed something if that's actually the case. Is there
really a non-Sun java that is 100% compatible? When I run java apps, I
IBM I believe
don't want something "interesting" to happen.
Thats about the trademark name not the code. You don't care what running
'frobozz' does, but what 'java' means..
Right - but I've just seen too much stuff that pretends to be java that
isn't quite. My latest encounter is a cell phone that doesn't give the
jvm access to its soft (and only) keyboard. You can install mini-opera
but you can't type a url...
This really does not apply, you are confounding JVM compliance with the
sandboxing technique the phone maker decided to adopt.
If JVM compliance doesn't require access to your input, why bother
testing something that can't work?
You can as easily have a Sun JVM running in Linux and denying it access
to a keyboard.
It isn't denied access as a permission issue. The code that would give
it access is replaced by custom code that requires matching changes in
the apps.
These are 2 completely orthogonal things.
It is either just a bug or an effort on the vendor's part to make people
buy their custom apps (which aren't available yet either..). They are
promising an update to fix it sometime in the distant future.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
