Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Two Issues : JSX detecting JVM and JSX telling us it is expired.

Expand Messages
  • James Maes
    Good Morning All. I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address. We purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but have
    Message 1 of 6 , Dec 26, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Good Morning All.

      I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address. We
      purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but have
      noticed a couple of little issues recently.

      First, we upgraded our version of Java (we run on HP-UX PA-RISC
      systems) to 1.5.5 and now JSX is complaining about not being able to
      determine the version of the JVM it is running for and says it is
      defaulting to a 1.4 version. I am happy to report that this is still
      working fine, it's just filling up our logs and causing the Systems
      Admins to yell at my team a little.

      I remember this issue coming up around 4 or 5 months ago, and I
      thought the new version of JSX removed this check. Working under
      that assumption, we downloaded a new version of JSX (from a URL that
      we downloaded our purchased version from, just incremented the
      version number as needed) but now we are seeing this.

      [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
      [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
      [java] If you need more time, please contact company@...
      (for work)
      [java] If you need more time, please contact company@...
      (for work)
      [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
      www.jsx.org/academic
      [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
      www.jsx.org/academic
      [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
      [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html

      We just downloaded the new version 2 weeks ago, plus we have what I
      thought was the proper purchased version so I am really confused and
      scared.

      Right now this only happens on our test box, but if it starts in
      production, things could get bad.

      In addition to this error, the new JSX jar (JSX2.2.5.2) is still
      complaining about the JVM version.


      For now I am rolling back our version of JSX from JSX2.2.5.2 to
      JSX2.2.5.1, but would like to know how to address the issues above
      and where to get a proper jar for the upgraded version (hopefully
      without the JVM check).

      Details:
      OS: HP-UX PA-RISC
      JVM: HP's JVM 1.5.5
      JSX Version: JSX2.2.5.1 and JSX2.2.5.2


      Thanks
      -JM
    • Brendan
      Hi James, We should be able to fix these hassles up quickly. Expired: I just checked the purchase version now, and confirmed that it is working normally (ie.
      Message 2 of 6 , Dec 26, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi James,

        We should be able to fix these hassles up quickly.

        Expired:
        I just checked the purchase version now, and confirmed that it is working normally (ie. not expired, and not giving the message you saw).

          (1) Could you download it again, and confirm whether this fixes the problem? This would be a simple fix.

        BTW: I have been working on our release system over the past few weeks, so it is possible you got an incorrect version at the exact time you downloaded. Seems unlikely, but that would explain what you are seeing. The purchased version of the jar has a few extra characters appended to the filename, relative to the trial version.


        JVM:
        The immediate solution to your problem is to add your specific JVM to the next release.

          (2) JSX should write out a detailed report on the JVM version etc - could you include that, please?

        This release should happen within a day of getting that info from you.

        Yes, you're right that I'd decided to disable the JVM check - but this caused problems for other users. Managing the targetting of multiple JVM versions and manufacturers is difficult.


        cheers,
        Brendan
        PS: It's late here right now, so I'll revisit the JVM problem in detail tomorrow. The problem is to target your JVM so that you won't get your logs filled up when you upgrade your JVM next time; and that won't interfere with JSX detecting a JVM it hasn't seen before. The difficulty is that whenever a JVM is upgraded, it is a "JVM it hasn't seen before", as it is *possible* the internal implementation of the JVM's serialization has been changed (ie, of JOS, Java Object Serialization) - and JSX relies on this internal implementation.

        But in reality, JOS doesn't change very often; I've only seen it change between major version releases of the specification (Java 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5) - implementation versions haven't changed the implementation at all, in fact. It's not something that other manufacturers want to mess around with either.


        On 27/12/06, James Maes <jjmaes@...> wrote:

        Good Morning All.

        I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address. We
        purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but have
        noticed a couple of little issues recently.

        First, we upgraded our version of Java (we run on HP-UX PA-RISC
        systems) to 1.5.5 and now JSX is complaining about not being able to
        determine the version of the JVM it is running for and says it is
        defaulting to a 1.4 version. I am happy to report that this is still
        working fine, it's just filling up our logs and causing the Systems
        Admins to yell at my team a little.

        I remember this issue coming up around 4 or 5 months ago, and I
        thought the new version of JSX removed this check. Working under
        that assumption, we downloaded a new version of JSX (from a URL that
        we downloaded our purchased version from, just incremented the
        version number as needed) but now we are seeing this.

        [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
        [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
        [java] If you need more time, please contact company@...
        (for work)
        [java] If you need more time, please contact company@...
        (for work)
        [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
        www.jsx.org/academic
        [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
        www.jsx.org/academic
        [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
        [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html

        We just downloaded the new version 2 weeks ago, plus we have what I
        thought was the proper purchased version so I am really confused and
        scared.

        Right now this only happens on our test box, but if it starts in
        production, things could get bad.

        In addition to this error, the new JSX jar (JSX2.2.5.2) is still
        complaining about the JVM version.

        For now I am rolling back our version of JSX from JSX2.2.5.2 to
        JSX2.2.5.1, but would like to know how to address the issues above
        and where to get a proper jar for the upgraded version (hopefully
        without the JVM check).

        Details:
        OS: HP-UX PA-RISC
        JVM: HP's JVM 1.5.5
        JSX Version: JSX2.2.5.1 and JSX2.2.5.2

        Thanks
        -JM


      • Brendan
        Hi James, Did the current download work for you? When you get a chance, could you send the version info that JSX outputs. I need the exact strings to be able
        Message 3 of 6 , Dec 28, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi James,

          Did the current download work for you?

          When you get a chance, could you send the version info that JSX outputs. I need the exact strings to be able to check for them, so I can remove these messages for you  It would also help me determine how best to avoid you seeing these messages in future.

          I hope you're feeling reassured.


          cheers,
          Brendan

          On 27/12/06, Brendan <melbourne.research@... > wrote:
          Hi James,

          We should be able to fix these hassles up quickly.

          Expired:
          I just checked the purchase version now, and confirmed that it is working normally (ie. not expired, and not giving the message you saw).

            (1) Could you download it again, and confirm whether this fixes the problem? This would be a simple fix.

          BTW: I have been working on our release system over the past few weeks, so it is possible you got an incorrect version at the exact time you downloaded. Seems unlikely, but that would explain what you are seeing. The purchased version of the jar has a few extra characters appended to the filename, relative to the trial version.


          JVM:
          The immediate solution to your problem is to add your specific JVM to the next release.

            (2) JSX should write out a detailed report on the JVM version etc - could you include that, please?

          This release should happen within a day of getting that info from you.

          Yes, you're right that I'd decided to disable the JVM check - but this caused problems for other users. Managing the targetting of multiple JVM versions and manufacturers is difficult.


          cheers,
          Brendan
          PS: It's late here right now, so I'll revisit the JVM problem in detail tomorrow. The problem is to target your JVM so that you won't get your logs filled up when you upgrade your JVM next time; and that won't interfere with JSX detecting a JVM it hasn't seen before. The difficulty is that whenever a JVM is upgraded, it is a "JVM it hasn't seen before", as it is *possible* the internal implementation of the JVM's serialization has been changed (ie, of JOS, Java Object Serialization) - and JSX relies on this internal implementation.

          But in reality, JOS doesn't change very often; I've only seen it change between major version releases of the specification (Java 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5) - implementation versions haven't changed the implementation at all, in fact. It's not something that other manufacturers want to mess around with either.



          On 27/12/06, James Maes < jjmaes@...> wrote:

          Good Morning All.

          I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address. We
          purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but have
          noticed a couple of little issues recently.

          First, we upgraded our version of Java (we run on HP-UX PA-RISC
          systems) to 1.5.5 and now JSX is complaining about not being able to
          determine the version of the JVM it is running for and says it is
          defaulting to a 1.4 version. I am happy to report that this is still
          working fine, it's just filling up our logs and causing the Systems
          Admins to yell at my team a little.

          I remember this issue coming up around 4 or 5 months ago, and I
          thought the new version of JSX removed this check. Working under
          that assumption, we downloaded a new version of JSX (from a URL that
          we downloaded our purchased version from, just incremented the
          version number as needed) but now we are seeing this.

          [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
          [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
          [java] If you need more time, please contact company@...
          (for work)
          [java] If you need more time, please contact company@...
          (for work)
          [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
          www.jsx.org/academic
          [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
          www.jsx.org/academic
          [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
          [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html

          We just downloaded the new version 2 weeks ago, plus we have what I
          thought was the proper purchased version so I am really confused and
          scared.

          Right now this only happens on our test box, but if it starts in
          production, things could get bad.

          In addition to this error, the new JSX jar (JSX2.2.5.2) is still
          complaining about the JVM version.

          For now I am rolling back our version of JSX from JSX2.2.5.2 to
          JSX2.2.5.1, but would like to know how to address the issues above
          and where to get a proper jar for the upgraded version (hopefully
          without the JVM check).

          Details:
          OS: HP-UX PA-RISC
          JVM: HP's JVM 1.5.5
          JSX Version: JSX2.2.5.1 and JSX2.2.5.2

          Thanks
          -JM



        • James Maes
          Sorry. I went a reply via email last week but looks like it never made it into the system. Here is a copy of that email: Here is the message from JSX while
          Message 4 of 6 , Dec 29, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Sorry. I went a reply via email last week but looks like it never
            made it into the system.

            Here is a copy of that email:


            Here is the message from JSX while running on the HP's.
            [java] ---ATTENTION!--- JSX could not recognize your
            implementation of java, which is:
            [java] implVendor="Hewlett-Packard Co."
            [java] specVersion="1.5"
            [java] implVersion=" 1.5.0.05"
            [java] In the meantime, JSX2 will try the standard
            implementation for Java 1.4 - which will probably work
            [java] Please post the above information to: jsx-
            ideas@yahoogroups.com
            [java] - in particular, please state whether the standard
            implementation worked or not, for both writing and reading. Please
            do a few tests before you post.

            [java] If JSX's guess really does work, it can be fixed with:
            [java] if (implVendor.equals("Hewlett-Packard Co.") &&
            specVersion.equals("1.5") && implVersion.equals ("1.5.0.02"))
            [java] magicName = "JSX.magic.MagicClass14";

            Also, I wont post the URL that I downloaded the file from, but could
            you send it to me privately since the URL that i used last time no
            longer works.

















            --- In JSX-ideas@yahoogroups.com, Brendan <melbourne.research@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > Hi James,
            >
            > Did the current download work for you?
            >
            > When you get a chance, could you send the version info that JSX
            outputs. I
            > need the exact strings to be able to check for them, so I can
            remove these
            > messages for you It would also help me determine how best to avoid
            you
            > seeing these messages in future.
            >
            > I hope you're feeling reassured.
            >
            >
            > cheers,
            > Brendan
            >
            > On 27/12/06, Brendan <melbourne.research@...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi James,
            > >
            > > We should be able to fix these hassles up quickly.
            > >
            > > Expired:
            > > I just checked the purchase version now, and confirmed that it is
            working
            > > normally (ie. not expired, and not giving the message you saw).
            > >
            > > (1) Could you download it again, and confirm whether this fixes
            the
            > > problem? This would be a simple fix.
            > >
            > > BTW: I have been working on our release system over the past few
            weeks, so
            > > it is possible you got an incorrect version at the exact time you
            > > downloaded. Seems unlikely, but that would explain what you are
            seeing. The
            > > purchased version of the jar has a few extra characters appended
            to the
            > > filename, relative to the trial version.
            > >
            > >
            > > JVM:
            > > The immediate solution to your problem is to add your specific
            JVM to the
            > > next release.
            > >
            > > (2) JSX should write out a detailed report on the JVM version
            etc -
            > > could you include that, please?
            > >
            > > This release should happen within a day of getting that info from
            you.
            > >
            > > Yes, you're right that I'd decided to disable the JVM check - but
            this
            > > caused problems for other users. Managing the targetting of
            multiple JVM
            > > versions and manufacturers is difficult.
            > >
            > >
            > > cheers,
            > > Brendan
            > > PS: It's late here right now, so I'll revisit the JVM problem in
            detail
            > > tomorrow. The problem is to target your JVM so that you won't get
            your logs
            > > filled up when you upgrade your JVM next time; and that won't
            interfere with
            > > JSX detecting a JVM it hasn't seen before. The difficulty is that
            whenever a
            > > JVM is upgraded, it is a "JVM it hasn't seen before", as it is
            *possible*
            > > the internal implementation of the JVM's serialization has been
            changed (ie,
            > > of JOS, Java Object Serialization) - and JSX relies on this
            internal
            > > implementation.
            > >
            > > But in reality, JOS doesn't change very often; I've only seen it
            change
            > > between major version releases of the specification (Java 1.2,
            1.3, 1.4,
            > > 1.5) - implementation versions haven't changed the implementation
            at all,
            > > in fact. It's not something that other manufacturers want to mess
            around
            > > with either.
            > >
            > >
            > > On 27/12/06, James Maes <jjmaes@...> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > Good Morning All.
            > > >
            > > > I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address.
            We
            > > > purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but
            have
            > > > noticed a couple of little issues recently.
            > > >
            > > > First, we upgraded our version of Java (we run on HP-UX PA-RISC
            > > > systems) to 1.5.5 and now JSX is complaining about not being
            able to
            > > > determine the version of the JVM it is running for and says it
            is
            > > > defaulting to a 1.4 version. I am happy to report that this is
            still
            > > > working fine, it's just filling up our logs and causing the
            Systems
            > > > Admins to yell at my team a little.
            > > >
            > > > I remember this issue coming up around 4 or 5 months ago, and I
            > > > thought the new version of JSX removed this check. Working under
            > > > that assumption, we downloaded a new version of JSX (from a URL
            that
            > > > we downloaded our purchased version from, just incremented the
            > > > version number as needed) but now we are seeing this.
            > > >
            > > > [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
            > > > [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
            > > > [java] If you need more time, please contact
            company@...<company%40jsx.org>
            > > > (for work)
            > > > [java] If you need more time, please contact
            company@...<company%40jsx.org>
            > > > (for work)
            > > > [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
            > > > www.jsx.org/academic
            > > > [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
            > > > www.jsx.org/academic
            > > > [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
            > > > [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
            > > >
            > > > We just downloaded the new version 2 weeks ago, plus we have
            what I
            > > > thought was the proper purchased version so I am really
            confused and
            > > > scared.
            > > >
            > > > Right now this only happens on our test box, but if it starts in
            > > > production, things could get bad.
            > > >
            > > > In addition to this error, the new JSX jar (JSX2.2.5.2) is still
            > > > complaining about the JVM version.
            > > >
            > > > For now I am rolling back our version of JSX from JSX2.2.5.2 to
            > > > JSX2.2.5.1, but would like to know how to address the issues
            above
            > > > and where to get a proper jar for the upgraded version
            (hopefully
            > > > without the JVM check).
            > > >
            > > > Details:
            > > > OS: HP-UX PA-RISC
            > > > JVM: HP's JVM 1.5.5
            > > > JSX Version: JSX2.2.5.1 and JSX2.2.5.2
            > > >
            > > > Thanks
            > > > -JM
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            >
          • Brendan
            Hi James, Thanks a lot, that s exactly the info I need. I ll get on to it tomorrow. cheers, Brendan
            Message 5 of 6 , Dec 29, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi James,

              Thanks a lot, that's exactly the info I need. I'll get on to it tomorrow.


              cheers,
              Brendan

              On 30/12/06, James Maes <jjmaes@...> wrote:


              Sorry. I went a reply via email last week but looks like it never
              made it into the system.

              Here is a copy of that email:

              Here is the message from JSX while running on the HP's.
              [java] ---ATTENTION!--- JSX could not recognize your
              implementation of java, which is:
              [java] implVendor="Hewlett-Packard Co."
              [java] specVersion="1.5"
              [java] implVersion=" 1.5.0.05"
              [java] In the meantime, JSX2 will try the standard
              implementation for Java 1.4 - which will probably work
              [java] Please post the above information to: jsx-
              ideas@yahoogroups.com
              [java] - in particular, please state whether the standard
              implementation worked or not, for both writing and reading. Please
              do a few tests before you post.

              [java] If JSX's guess really does work, it can be fixed with:
              [java] if (implVendor.equals("Hewlett-Packard Co.") &&
              specVersion.equals("1.5") && implVersion.equals ("1.5.0.02"))
              [java] magicName = "JSX.magic.MagicClass14";

              Also, I wont post the URL that I downloaded the file from, but could
              you send it to me privately since the URL that i used last time no
              longer works.

              --- In JSX-ideas@yahoogroups.com, Brendan <melbourne.research@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > Hi James,
              >
              > Did the current download work for you?
              >
              > When you get a chance, could you send the version info that JSX
              outputs. I
              > need the exact strings to be able to check for them, so I can
              remove these
              > messages for you It would also help me determine how best to avoid
              you
              > seeing these messages in future.
              >
              > I hope you're feeling reassured.
              >
              >
              > cheers,
              > Brendan
              >

              > On 27/12/06, Brendan <melbourne.research@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > Hi James,
              > >
              > > We should be able to fix these hassles up quickly.
              > >
              > > Expired:
              > > I just checked the purchase version now, and confirmed that it is
              working
              > > normally (ie. not expired, and not giving the message you saw).
              > >
              > > (1) Could you download it again, and confirm whether this fixes
              the
              > > problem? This would be a simple fix.
              > >
              > > BTW: I have been working on our release system over the past few
              weeks, so
              > > it is possible you got an incorrect version at the exact time you
              > > downloaded. Seems unlikely, but that would explain what you are
              seeing. The
              > > purchased version of the jar has a few extra characters appended
              to the
              > > filename, relative to the trial version.
              > >
              > >
              > > JVM:
              > > The immediate solution to your problem is to add your specific
              JVM to the
              > > next release.
              > >
              > > (2) JSX should write out a detailed report on the JVM version
              etc -
              > > could you include that, please?
              > >
              > > This release should happen within a day of getting that info from
              you.
              > >
              > > Yes, you're right that I'd decided to disable the JVM check - but
              this
              > > caused problems for other users. Managing the targetting of
              multiple JVM
              > > versions and manufacturers is difficult.
              > >
              > >
              > > cheers,
              > > Brendan
              > > PS: It's late here right now, so I'll revisit the JVM problem in
              detail
              > > tomorrow. The problem is to target your JVM so that you won't get
              your logs
              > > filled up when you upgrade your JVM next time; and that won't
              interfere with
              > > JSX detecting a JVM it hasn't seen before. The difficulty is that
              whenever a
              > > JVM is upgraded, it is a "JVM it hasn't seen before", as it is
              *possible*
              > > the internal implementation of the JVM's serialization has been
              changed (ie,
              > > of JOS, Java Object Serialization) - and JSX relies on this
              internal
              > > implementation.
              > >
              > > But in reality, JOS doesn't change very often; I've only seen it
              change
              > > between major version releases of the specification (Java 1.2,
              1.3, 1.4,
              > > 1.5) - implementation versions haven't changed the implementation
              at all,
              > > in fact. It's not something that other manufacturers want to mess
              around
              > > with either.
              > >
              > >
              > > On 27/12/06, James Maes <jjmaes@...> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > Good Morning All.
              > > >
              > > > I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address.
              We
              > > > purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but
              have
              > > > noticed a couple of little issues recently.
              > > >
              > > > First, we upgraded our version of Java (we run on HP-UX PA-RISC
              > > > systems) to 1.5.5 and now JSX is complaining about not being
              able to
              > > > determine the version of the JVM it is running for and says it
              is
              > > > defaulting to a 1.4 version. I am happy to report that this is
              still
              > > > working fine, it's just filling up our logs and causing the
              Systems
              > > > Admins to yell at my team a little.
              > > >
              > > > I remember this issue coming up around 4 or 5 months ago, and I
              > > > thought the new version of JSX removed this check. Working under
              > > > that assumption, we downloaded a new version of JSX (from a URL
              that
              > > > we downloaded our purchased version from, just incremented the
              > > > version number as needed) but now we are seeing this.
              > > >
              > > > [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
              > > > [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
              > > > [java] If you need more time, please contact
              company@...<company%40jsx.org>
              > > > (for work)
              > > > [java] If you need more time, please contact
              company@...<company%40jsx.org>

              > > > (for work)
              > > > [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
              > > > www.jsx.org/academic
              > > > [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
              > > > www.jsx.org/academic
              > > > [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
              > > > [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
              > > >
              > > > We just downloaded the new version 2 weeks ago, plus we have
              what I
              > > > thought was the proper purchased version so I am really
              confused and
              > > > scared.
              > > >
              > > > Right now this only happens on our test box, but if it starts in
              > > > production, things could get bad.
              > > >
              > > > In addition to this error, the new JSX jar (JSX2.2.5.2) is still
              > > > complaining about the JVM version.
              > > >
              > > > For now I am rolling back our version of JSX from JSX2.2.5.2 to
              > > > JSX2.2.5.1, but would like to know how to address the issues
              above
              > > > and where to get a proper jar for the upgraded version
              (hopefully
              > > > without the JVM check).
              > > >
              > > > Details:
              > > > OS: HP-UX PA-RISC
              > > > JVM: HP's JVM 1.5.5
              > > > JSX Version: JSX2.2.5.1 and JSX2.2.5.2
              > > >
              > > > Thanks
              > > > -JM
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > >
              > >
              >


            • Brendan
              Hi James, I ve just released a version of JSX that does not output warning messages for your JVM - sorry for the delay. That is, for this JVM:
              Message 6 of 6 , Jan 1, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi James,

                I've just released a version of JSX that does not output warning messages for your JVM - sorry for the delay. That is, for this JVM:
                  implVendor="Hewlett-Packard Co."
                  specVersion="1.5"
                  implVersion=" 1.5.0.05"

                It is version 2.2.5.3, and is available as both a trial and purchase version.

                I would appreciate it if you could confirm that it works correctly on your actual installation when you get a chance.


                cheers,
                Brendan

                On 30/12/06, Brendan <melbourne.research@...> wrote:
                Hi James,

                Thanks a lot, that's exactly the info I need. I'll get on to it tomorrow.


                cheers,
                Brendan


                On 30/12/06, James Maes <jjmaes@...> wrote:


                Sorry. I went a reply via email last week but looks like it never
                made it into the system.

                Here is a copy of that email:

                Here is the message from JSX while running on the HP's.
                [java] ---ATTENTION!--- JSX could not recognize your
                implementation of java, which is:
                [java] implVendor="Hewlett-Packard Co."
                [java] specVersion="1.5"
                [java] implVersion=" 1.5.0.05"
                [java] In the meantime, JSX2 will try the standard
                implementation for Java 1.4 - which will probably work
                [java] Please post the above information to: jsx-
                ideas@yahoogroups.com
                [java] - in particular, please state whether the standard
                implementation worked or not, for both writing and reading. Please
                do a few tests before you post.

                [java] If JSX's guess really does work, it can be fixed with:
                [java] if (implVendor.equals("Hewlett-Packard Co.") &&
                specVersion.equals("1.5") && implVersion.equals ("1.5.0.02"))
                [java] magicName = "JSX.magic.MagicClass14";

                Also, I wont post the URL that I downloaded the file from, but could
                you send it to me privately since the URL that i used last time no
                longer works.

                --- In JSX-ideas@yahoogroups.com, Brendan <melbourne.research@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > Hi James,
                >
                > Did the current download work for you?
                >
                > When you get a chance, could you send the version info that JSX
                outputs. I
                > need the exact strings to be able to check for them, so I can
                remove these
                > messages for you It would also help me determine how best to avoid
                you
                > seeing these messages in future.
                >
                > I hope you're feeling reassured.
                >
                >
                > cheers,
                > Brendan
                >

                > On 27/12/06, Brendan <melbourne.research@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > Hi James,
                > >
                > > We should be able to fix these hassles up quickly.
                > >
                > > Expired:
                > > I just checked the purchase version now, and confirmed that it is
                working
                > > normally (ie. not expired, and not giving the message you saw).
                > >
                > > (1) Could you download it again, and confirm whether this fixes
                the
                > > problem? This would be a simple fix.
                > >
                > > BTW: I have been working on our release system over the past few
                weeks, so
                > > it is possible you got an incorrect version at the exact time you
                > > downloaded. Seems unlikely, but that would explain what you are
                seeing. The
                > > purchased version of the jar has a few extra characters appended
                to the
                > > filename, relative to the trial version.
                > >
                > >
                > > JVM:
                > > The immediate solution to your problem is to add your specific
                JVM to the
                > > next release.
                > >
                > > (2) JSX should write out a detailed report on the JVM version
                etc -
                > > could you include that, please?
                > >
                > > This release should happen within a day of getting that info from
                you.
                > >
                > > Yes, you're right that I'd decided to disable the JVM check - but
                this
                > > caused problems for other users. Managing the targetting of
                multiple JVM
                > > versions and manufacturers is difficult.
                > >
                > >
                > > cheers,
                > > Brendan
                > > PS: It's late here right now, so I'll revisit the JVM problem in
                detail
                > > tomorrow. The problem is to target your JVM so that you won't get
                your logs
                > > filled up when you upgrade your JVM next time; and that won't
                interfere with
                > > JSX detecting a JVM it hasn't seen before. The difficulty is that
                whenever a
                > > JVM is upgraded, it is a "JVM it hasn't seen before", as it is
                *possible*
                > > the internal implementation of the JVM's serialization has been
                changed (ie,
                > > of JOS, Java Object Serialization) - and JSX relies on this
                internal
                > > implementation.
                > >
                > > But in reality, JOS doesn't change very often; I've only seen it
                change
                > > between major version releases of the specification (Java 1.2,
                1.3, 1.4,
                > > 1.5) - implementation versions haven't changed the implementation
                at all,
                > > in fact. It's not something that other manufacturers want to mess
                around
                > > with either.
                > >
                > >
                > > On 27/12/06, James Maes <jjmaes@...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Good Morning All.
                > > >
                > > > I have two issues that I am hoping someone can help us address.
                We
                > > > purchased JSX around 9 months ago and have been very happy but
                have
                > > > noticed a couple of little issues recently.
                > > >
                > > > First, we upgraded our version of Java (we run on HP-UX PA-RISC
                > > > systems) to 1.5.5 and now JSX is complaining about not being
                able to
                > > > determine the version of the JVM it is running for and says it
                is
                > > > defaulting to a 1.4 version. I am happy to report that this is
                still
                > > > working fine, it's just filling up our logs and causing the
                Systems
                > > > Admins to yell at my team a little.
                > > >
                > > > I remember this issue coming up around 4 or 5 months ago, and I
                > > > thought the new version of JSX removed this check. Working under
                > > > that assumption, we downloaded a new version of JSX (from a URL
                that
                > > > we downloaded our purchased version from, just incremented the
                > > > version number as needed) but now we are seeing this.
                > > >
                > > > [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
                > > > [java] Thanks for evaluating JSX for 30 days.
                > > > [java] If you need more time, please contact
                company@...<company%40jsx.org>
                > > > (for work)
                > > > [java] If you need more time, please contact
                company@...<company%40jsx.org>

                > > > (for work)
                > > > [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
                > > > www.jsx.org/academic
                > > > [java] For students, an academic version is avaiable at:
                > > > www.jsx.org/academic
                > > > [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
                > > > [java] Buy JSX at www.jsx.org/buy.html
                > > >
                > > > We just downloaded the new version 2 weeks ago, plus we have
                what I
                > > > thought was the proper purchased version so I am really
                confused and
                > > > scared.
                > > >
                > > > Right now this only happens on our test box, but if it starts in
                > > > production, things could get bad.
                > > >
                > > > In addition to this error, the new JSX jar (JSX2.2.5.2) is still
                > > > complaining about the JVM version.
                > > >
                > > > For now I am rolling back our version of JSX from JSX2.2.5.2 to
                > > > JSX2.2.5.1, but would like to know how to address the issues
                above
                > > > and where to get a proper jar for the upgraded version
                (hopefully
                > > > without the JVM check).
                > > >
                > > > Details:
                > > > OS: HP-UX PA-RISC
                > > > JVM: HP's JVM 1.5.5
                > > > JSX Version: JSX2.2.5.1 and JSX2.2.5.2
                > > >
                > > > Thanks
                > > > -JM
                > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > >
                > >
                >



              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.