gmane.comp.java.vm.sablevm.devel archive

422 archived articles, newest first (page 4 of 5). Latest articles →

Latest bug fixes
Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:53:19 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1588
Re: Many bugfixes in staging
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:19:56 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1587
Staging is dead; long lives the trunk!
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 11:52:23 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1586
staging -> trunk
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:49:19 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1585
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:48:56 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1584
Many bugfixes in staging
Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:20:36 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1583
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:36:09 -0600
Archie Cobbs <[email protected]> • #1582
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:39:28 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1581
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:26:28 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1580
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:10:28 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1579
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 14:30:28 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1578
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:06:43 -0600
Archie Cobbs <[email protected]> • #1577
Re: Repository and release numbering changes
Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:12:15 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1576
Repository and release numbering changes
Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:24:37 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1575
Re: Gtk+ peer broken?
Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:34:06 +0100
Michael Koch <[email protected]> • #1574
Re: Gtk+ peer broken?
Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:41:21 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1573
Re: Gtk+ peer broken?
Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:30:00 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1572
Re: Gtk+ peer broken?
Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:00:14 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1571
Re: Debugging interface progress
Sun, 06 Mar 2005 14:28:34 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1570
Debugging interface progress
Sun, 06 Mar 2005 13:22:15 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1569
Re: I need an unused bit in the bidirectionnal layout object
Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:11:58 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1568
Re: I need an unused bit in the bidirectionnal layout object
Thu, 03 Mar 2005 13:48:31 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1567
Re: I need an unused bit in the bidirectionnal layout object
Thu, 03 Mar 2005 13:34:36 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1566
Re: I need an unused bit in the bidirectionnal layout object
Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:42:59 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1565
I need an unused bit in the bidirectionnal layout object
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:23:00 -0500
Sébastien Adam <[email protected]> • #1564
Re: SableVM lockword bits
Wed, 02 Mar 2005 12:08:27 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1563
SableVM lockword bits
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:52:29 -0500
Sébastien Adam <[email protected]> • #1562
Re: error while loading shared librairies
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 08:57:15 -0500
Sébastien Adam <[email protected]> • #1561
Re: error while loading shared librairies
Wed, 2 Mar 2005 08:52:35 -0500
Sébastien Adam <[email protected]> • #1560
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:46:25 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1559
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:45:02 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1558
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:42:31 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1557
Re: Eclipse broken?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 21:12:44 +0100
Michael Koch <[email protected]> • #1556
Re: Eclipse broken?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 14:00:59 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1555
Re: Eclipse broken?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 19:46:57 +0100
Michael Koch <[email protected]> • #1554
Eclipse broken?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:34:48 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1553
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Sat, 26 Feb 2005 12:47:16 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1552
Re: application versus library classes question
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:41:36 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1551
Re: application versus library classes question
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:39:35 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1550
Re: application versus library classes question
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:32:43 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1549
application versus library classes question
Thu, 24 Feb 2005 20:46:36 -0500 (EST)
Jennifer LHOTAK <[email protected]> • #1548
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:46:55 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1547
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:14:25 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1546
Re: Classpath merge progress?
Wed, 23 Feb 2005 03:24:13 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1545
Classpath merge progress?
Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:40:01 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1544
Re: Assertion fails when calling java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke()
Mon, 21 Feb 2005 01:35:01 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1543
Re: Assertion fails when calling java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke()
Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:29:16 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1542
Merging classpath and preparing 1.1.10
Sat, 19 Feb 2005 12:38:27 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1541
Assertion fails when calling java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke()
Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:55:51 -0500
[email protected] • #1540
Re: "make" process for a release
Thu, 17 Feb 2005 14:48:17 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1539
"make" process for a release
Thu, 17 Feb 2005 08:38:10 -0500
Peter Lovell <[email protected]> • #1538
Re: m4 question
Thu, 17 Feb 2005 03:09:34 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1537
Re: m4 question
Thu, 17 Feb 2005 02:40:46 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1536
Re: m4 question
Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:39:31 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1535
Re: m4 question
Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:37:43 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1534
m4 question
Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:35:19 -0500 (EST)
Jennifer LHOTAK <[email protected]> • #1533
RE: C++ JNI interface
Mon, 14 Feb 2005 15:07:25 +0100
"Galmes, jose" <[email protected]> • #1532
Re: C++ JNI interface
Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:56:50 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1531
Re: C++ JNI interface
Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:32:13 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1530
C++ JNI interface
Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:18:10 +0100
"Galmes, jose" <[email protected]> • #1529
Thread problems: vm does not exit
Wed, 09 Feb 2005 19:05:45 +0100
Wolfgang Baer <[email protected]> • #1528
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:26:04 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1527
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 21:36:54 -0600 (CST)
Carl Lebsack <[email protected]> • #1526
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 22:30:30 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1525
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 17:26:09 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1524
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 16:12:54 -0600 (CST)
Carl Lebsack <[email protected]> • #1523
Re: inline keyword and profiling
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:31:58 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1522
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:25:47 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1521
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:10:59 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1520
Re: inline keyword and profiling
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 16:17:34 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1519
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:26:28 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1518
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:19:36 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1517
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 13:41:36 -0600 (CST)
Carl Lebsack <[email protected]> • #1516
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 06 Feb 2005 14:24:48 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1515
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 13:07:21 -0600 (CST)
Carl Lebsack <[email protected]> • #1514
Re: incorrect use of 0L constant in LDIV, LREM?
Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:09:16 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1513
incorrect use of 0L constant in LDIV, LREM?
Sat, 05 Feb 2005 17:06:10 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1512
Re: inline keyword and profiling
Fri, 04 Feb 2005 19:27:42 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1511
inline keyword and profiling
Fri, 04 Feb 2005 19:18:13 -0500
Chris Pickett <[email protected]> • #1510
Re: Implementation of JNI 1.4 features in SableVM
Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:46:35 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1509
Re: Implementation of JNI 1.4 features in SableVM
Sat, 29 Jan 2005 21:31:12 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1508
Re: help requested - problem with tool configuration
Sat, 29 Jan 2005 10:04:02 -0500
Peter Lovell <[email protected]> • #1507
Re: help requested - problem with tool configuration
Fri, 28 Jan 2005 23:39:43 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1506
help requested - problem with tool configuration
Fri, 28 Jan 2005 18:56:04 -0500
Peter Lovell <[email protected]> • #1505
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Thu, 27 Jan 2005 19:55:13 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1504
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Wed, 26 Jan 2005 16:36:29 -0600 (CST)
Carl Lebsack <[email protected]> • #1503
Re: Problem with 1.1.9?
Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:18:10 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1502
Problem with 1.1.9?
Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:07:50 -0600 (CST)
Carl Lebsack <[email protected]> • #1501
Re: SableJIT integration in SableVM
Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:40:45 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1500
Re: SableJIT integration in SableVM
Sat, 22 Jan 2005 15:39:34 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1499
Re: SableVM 1.1.9 tarballs available
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:17:07 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1498
SableVM 1.1.9 tarballs available
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 02:53:25 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1497
Re: SableJIT integration in SableVM
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:10:58 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1496
Implementation of JNI 1.4 features in SableVM
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:20:54 +0100
Gregory Pakosz <[email protected]> • #1495
Re: Serious regression in staging
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:22:22 -0500
David Bélanger <[email protected]> • #1494
Re: forced casts question
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:25:14 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1493
Re: Java_java_lang_VMClass_getDeclaredFields question
Wed, 19 Jan 2005 01:20:13 -0500
Etienne Gagnon <[email protected]> • #1492
Re: Serious regression in staging
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:47:31 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1491
distclean [was: Re: UnsatisfiedLinkError]
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:31:35 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1490
Re: SableJIT integration in SableVM
Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:40:30 -0500
"Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[email protected]> • #1489
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.