Can Sun JDK 118 run on Windows XP?

[Mickey Segal]

We still use Sun's JDK 118 to sign Java applet code using the old Sun
signing since this is needed for Macintosh OS 9. When we upgraded our
development computer from a Windows 98 computer to a Windows XP computer the
JDK 118 environment no longer worked. Even appletviewer trying to run a
HelloWorld program in the same folder results in one of those boxes saying
that appletviewer "has encountered a problem and needs to close".

Is the JDK 118 environment too old to run on Windows XP (I tried setting the
DOS compatibility box to Windows 98 with no avail)? Is there some missing
configuration (such as path or classpath) that could cause a problem this
bad? Are there other good ways to generate and sign code on Windows XP
using the Sun 1.x signing system?

We could do the Sun signing on a Windows 98 computer or tell our Macintosh
OS 9 users to upgrade or else, but it would be nice to be able to generate
and sign the code for all environments on one computer as we did using
Windows 98.

 

[Lothar Kimmeringer]

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:16:34 -0500, Mickey Segal wrote:

[Sun JDK 1.1 not working on XP]

The only solution I found is using the IBM JDK 1.1 instead.
It works on Windows XP and also on Windows 2000 where the
SUN JDK is making troubles as well on some systems.


Regards, Lothar
--
Lothar Kimmeringer E-Mail: (e-mail address removed)
PGP-encrypted mails preferred (Key-ID: 0x8BC3CD81)

Always remember: The answer is forty-two, there can only be wrong
questions!

 

[Mickey Segal]

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:16:34 -0500, Mickey Segal wrote:

[Sun JDK 1.1 not working on XP]

The only solution I found is using the IBM JDK 1.1 instead.
It works on Windows XP and also on Windows 2000 where the
SUN JDK is making troubles as well on some systems.

It sounds like you are confirming Sun JDK 1.1 not working on XP. It would
be helpful to know that is the case since I would not spend any more time
trying to get it to work there.

Am I correct in assuming that one can do JDK 1.1 signing on the IBM JDK 1.1?

 

[Mickey Segal]

The only solution I found is using the IBM JDK 1.1 instead.
It works on Windows XP and also on Windows 2000 where the
SUN JDK is making troubles as well on some systems.

Is the IBM JDK 1.1 still available? I'm having trouble finding it.

If anyone knows of some workaround to get the Sun JDK 1.1 working on Windows
XP I'd appreciate hearing about it. One might imagine that setting the DOS
compatibility box to Windows 98 for some set of files might do the trick,
but I don't know enough about the JDK to know which files to specify for
this modification.

 

[Lothar Kimmeringer]

Is the IBM JDK 1.1 still available? I'm having trouble finding it.

I would send a link to you by email, but I'm not able to.

If anyone knows of some workaround to get the Sun JDK 1.1 working on Windows
XP I'd appreciate hearing about it.

I was looking for a workaround last year and I haven't found one, yet.
The virtual machine itself is crashig, so I doubt that there will be
a workaround.


Regards, Lothar
--
Lothar Kimmeringer E-Mail: (e-mail address removed)
PGP-encrypted mails preferred (Key-ID: 0x8BC3CD81)

Always remember: The answer is forty-two, there can only be wrong
questions!

 

[Mickey Segal]

I would send a link to you by email, but I'm not able to.


I was looking for a workaround last year and I haven't found one, yet.
The virtual machine itself is crashig, so I doubt that there will be
a workaround.

The IBM JDK 1.1 does have javakey.exe but not jar.exe, so I am still stuck
on making a JRE 1.1.8 JAR file since running Sun JDK 1.1.8 jar.exe crashes
on XP, as it seems does anything using Sun JDK 1.1.8 on XP.

I tried the following ways of creating a JAR file without success:
1. Using Netscape's "signtool", which makes JARs and signs them, did not
seem to work because there appears to be no way to use signtool to JAR but
not sign.
2. Using a cab2jar utility provided by Microsoft does not work. A JAR file
is created but it does not contain a META-INF folder; instead there is a
*.osd file, which doesn't satisfy the target environment (Macintosh OS 9).

I imagine the JARring and signing could be done using Sun's Java 2 SDK, but
I understand there are problems with Java 2 dependent code being produced.

Is there some JAR tool that will work on Windows XP and produce a JAR that
will look like an authentic JDK 1.1 Sun JAR? It would be a bother to have
to divide production between two computers; it seems like there should be a
way to do this under XP. It would not be surprising if there were some
compatibility setting one could set for the relevant Sun JDK 1.1 files to
make this work, but I don't know enough about the JDK to guess what that
might be. And it would be a shame to tell our Macintosh OS 9 users that
they are out of luck.

 

[Lothar Kimmeringer]

Is there some JAR tool that will work on Windows XP and produce a JAR that
will look like an authentic JDK 1.1 Sun JAR? It would be a bother to have
to divide production between two computers; it seems like there should be a
way to do this under XP. It would not be surprising if there were some
compatibility setting one could set for the relevant Sun JDK 1.1 files to
make this work, but I don't know enough about the JDK to guess what that
might be. And it would be a shame to tell our Macintosh OS 9 users that
they are out of luck.

I never signed something with Java 1.1, but reading your problems
the solution Linux comes to my mind, more and more, but I'm not
sure that signing is possible with Blackdown JDK 1.1 (there is
no SUN-JDK 1.1). But under Linux there is simply no problem at
all using different virtual machines on the same platform without
the fear that one machine is interfering with another. And the
Blackdown or IBM JDK 1.1 is still running on the most current
Linux-distributions.


Regards, Lothar
--
Lothar Kimmeringer E-Mail: (e-mail address removed)
PGP-encrypted mails preferred (Key-ID: 0x8BC3CD81)

Always remember: The answer is forty-two, there can only be wrong
questions!

 

[John C. Bollinger]

Is the IBM JDK 1.1 still available? I'm having trouble finding it.

If anyone knows of some workaround to get the Sun JDK 1.1 working on Windows
XP I'd appreciate hearing about it. One might imagine that setting the DOS
compatibility box to Windows 98 for some set of files might do the trick,
but I don't know enough about the JDK to know which files to specify for
this modification.

Have you tried opening a console window with Windows 98 compatibility
enabled, and running in that? I _think_ you can configure compatability
modes on a shortcut. In any event, if you are running the command line
tools (including GUI tools and applications when started from the
command line) then I would be surprised to find that you could configure
them for compatibility modes in any other way.


John Bollinger
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Mickey Segal]

Have you tried opening a console window with Windows 98 compatibility
enabled, and running in that? I _think_ you can configure compatability
modes on a shortcut. In any event, if you are running the command line
tools (including GUI tools and applications when started from the
command line) then I would be surprised to find that you could configure
them for compatibility modes in any other way.

I tried this and neither Windows 95 nor Windows 98 compatibility mode for
the command.com instance fixes the problem. There are other options to
configure but it is not clear they would have an effect. I also have
Windows 98 compatibility mode set for appletviewer.exe, but the common
thread seems to be using the JRE and it is not clear what to set to deal
with that.

Under Windows 98 there was a way of going into DOS in a way that was more
insulated from Windows but I don't know if that still exists in XP.
However, I did not need to use that to get JRE 118 to work.

This is not to imply that I think it is impossible to do this, but I am at
the edge of my DOS/XP knowledge is trying to make this work.

I suppose I can just update our software once a month on Windows 98 for the
Macintosh OS 9 folks who need the Sun signing, but it would be nice to break
the last need for Windows 98.

 

[Mickey Segal]

I never signed something with Java 1.1, but reading your problems
the solution Linux comes to my mind, more and more, but I'm not
sure that signing is possible with Blackdown JDK 1.1 (there is
no SUN-JDK 1.1).

Keeping Windows 98 going would be easier than adding Linux. I'm just hoping
to find something like IBM's version of jar.exe support that will allow this
to work on XP, finding some way of getting Sun's JDK 118 to work on XP, or
finding some other way of creating a JRE 1.1 JAR file on XP.