🚀 go-pugleaf

John

Thanks for the reply

More detail:
1 Compile using JB2005, JDK1.5 and JDK1.5 specific libraries and run on ME, 
JVM 1.5  - Exception in Kernel
2 Compile using JB2005, JDK1.5 and JDK1.5 specific libraries and run on XP, 
JVM 1.5  - OK
3 Compile using JBX, JDK1.4 and JDK1.4 specific libraries and run on ME, JVM 
1.5/1.4  - OK
4 Compile using JBX, JDK1.4 and JDK1.4 specific libraries and run on XP, JVM 
1.5/1.4  - OK

In all cases. I am compiling to Windows executable - the only problem is 
with JB2005 + JDK1.5 + ME + JVM 1.5.
I'd like to do more testing - in particular JB2005 + JDK1.4 + ME + JVM 1.4.- 
but don't have an ME client available locally (yet).

Also, in all cases, the app runs just fine if I launch from the .jar file 
rather than and .exe.

It looks like the problem is associated with the JB2005 + JDK1.5 + ME + JVM 
1.5 combination - but you also saw this with 1.4 code - could it be that the 
problem lies in a difference between the .exe generated by JBX/JB2005? - Do 
you know id the .exe code has been changed?

db



"John McGrath [TeamB]" <ng-b@JPMcGrath.net> wrote in message 
news:xn0dzmx5hzeoju003@newsgroups.borland.com...
> On 3/10/2005 at 9:43:02 AM, David Bolsover wrote:
>
>> I have a swing application that uses some JDK 1.5 specific libraries &
>> has been compled to a native windows executable using the JB2005 wizard.
>>
>> The app runs just fine on an XP machine but fails on an ME box with an
>> exception in KERNEL.
>>
>> Has anyone else seen similar problems / have solution?
>>
>> Rolling the app back to use older, non JDK 1.5 specific libraries and
>> compiling against JDK 1.4, the app runs just fine.
>>
>> I suspect that the problem lies in the Borland .exe wrapper since it
>> always runs OK when launched from the .jar no matter what the target JVM.
>
> I just tried it and got the exception also.  However, even when I
> generated Java 1.4 code, I saw the problem.
>
> You were not very specific about the JVM you used to run the program.  Did
> you run with JDK 1.5 in both cases?  Or did you switch to JDK 1.4?  I
> think you would have had to re-install, or at least set some registry
> settings, unless you have set up a config file that points to the JDK.
> FYI, I was running against JDK 1.5.0_02 in both cases.
>
> -- 
> Regards,
>
> John McGrath [TeamB]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Before sending me e-mail, please read:
>    http://www.JPMcGrath.net/newsgroups/e-mail.html