Jump to content
Excelsior Forums

scov

Members
  • Content count

    0
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About scov

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Hello, I have been trying to compile & run a web application (under Tomcat7) using ExclesiorJet11 but I am stuck. I managed to successfully compile the app with 0 errors but when I try to run it I get the following error message: JET RUNTIME HAS DETECTED UNRECOVERABLE ERROR: runtime error This Tomcat application runs in a protected environment which has detected that app configuration has changed unexpectedly. This error may occur if you replace/change/delete some webapps. Try to recompile the application. If the error persists please, contact Excelsior Support Dept. at java@excelsior-usa.com Please, contact Excelsior Support at <java@excelsior-usa.com>. Extra information about error is saved in the "jet_err_952.txt" file. I am unsure why this is happening, so could anyone please give me some leads. Here is some extra info about the system I am running on: Version Information: Java version: 1.8.0_40 Excelsior JET 11.00 Enterprise edition JET Profile: Java SE version: 1.8.0_40; JET update level: 0; CPU architecture: amd64 Runtime: Server CPU features: cmov mmx sse sse2 sse3 ssse3 sse4.1 cx8 cx16 OS: CentOS Linux 7 (Core) Linux 3.10.0-327.4.5.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Mon Jan 25 22:07:14 UTC 2016 x86_64 glibc 2.17 Thanks
  2. OS X Excelsior JET built-in Installer...

    Hello, just dropping by to check whether, by any chance, support for installation packages has now a set date, or still no ETA.
  3. Question on JetPack II "Resources" view

    Thank you, there's a legend at the bottom of the window, should've been pretty self-explanatory.
  4. Hello, In JetPack II, at the 2nd step - "Resources" - there is a left pane called "Files to package". At a minimum, it contains the executable I created + runtime files. On the right side, there's a "Classpath" view with a "tree". It shows the executable and a bunch of leaves - jar files. Does the presence of these files (always) mean that they have been included ('optimized') inside the executable, per selections performed at Step 3 inside Jet Control Panel? Thank you.
  5. OS X Excelsior JET built-in Installer...

    That sounds marvellous, thank you for all the details.
  6. OS X Excelsior JET built-in Installer...

    Thank you. Since you used the word "yet", I suppose this means that there are plans to develop it? If so, can you tell me if the requirement expressed in my initial question on your "todo" list?
  7. Is an app using Excelsior Installer as a back-end (provided it is properly signed) submit-able "as it is" to the Apple Store?
  8. Are there any plans to add to JetPack II the ability to create installer packages that deploy applications that use multiple directories? Per my understanding, at this time, only 3rd party setup tools can be used to accomplish this.
  9. Hello, I am wondering about the following scenario: an executable is obtained using Excelsior 7 (version chosen quite randomly). A minimal (runnable) package would then contain the Runtime along with the exe. Assuming that an Excelsior 8 (chosen pseudo-randomly: ver. # intentionally higher) runtime directory would overwrite the Excelsior 7 one in the target folder, and that both runtimes have been defined the same in Jet Control Panel (e.g. TYPICAL, SMART, or CUSTOM w/ exactly the same settings)...would the binary compiled with the older one still be runnable? In other words, I am wondering about the backwards compatibility of runtimes with files that have been optimized using older versions. What about the other way around, older runtimes supporting binaries compiled using newer optimizers? Same restrictions apply as above, and, more than that, I am assuming that both profiles would be compatible (e.g. not attempting to run code that uses Java 8 features on a Java 7 VM). For example, running an equivalent of Java 6 update 7 should be enough to support files that have been compiled under Java 6 update 43 (IOW micro-updates).
  10. Supposing I have two Java applications, that I made into executables...JetPackII will prepare the extra folders that are needed to run the binaries on other systems. Each one will come with its own set of supporting files. Is there a way to "link" these two executables to the same Excelsior "backing" folders?
  11. Hello, I ran into a certain issue while migrating our project to a newer Excelsior version. Not sure if this is an issue per-se, or we are just using some deprecated features. Or something else I'm missing altogether. We've been using the Professional version of Excelsior for a while. Initially, we used Excelsior 6.4, then I migrated our project to 8.0 and now trying to do the same to 9.0 (latest maintenance pack installed). While the transition from 6.4 to 8 has been smooth (no changes made to either the prj file or jpn), I encounter a rather interesting issue when attempting to migrate the project to the latest Excelsior. As soon as I install the kit (created through INNO Setup) and start the application, I am greeted by a message that reads: "Warning: unknown JET property: jet.jit.cache." Once acknowledged, the application continues to run normally. (As it stands, in the docs, under "JET Runtime-specific properties", I see no mention of this property; nor was I able to find a list with all the available ones. As a side-note, in the JetPackII we also use the -D jet.jit.fast, which is also not mentioned there at least...yet I don't get any runtime warning for this property.) To give a complete description of the situation: 1. In both versions of JetPack II (8.0 and 9.0, same underlying jpn file loaded) I have the same flags: -D jet.jit.fast and -D jet.jit.cache. 2. Same prj file loaded in the Excelsior control panel: - in Excelsior 8.0, step 4, under JIT Compiler: JIT operation mode = Fast (lower overhead); JIT caching mode = Enabled (use default directory); - Excelsior 9.0, same context: JIT operation mode = Fast (lower overhead) - even if I select another option under from the drop-down box, it will revert to this selection; JIT caching mode - again, no matter what I select, it defaults back to Disabled. I guess this is why I get the warning at runtime. The only other difference between the two setups I can think of is that Excelsior 9 runs on a Windows XP over a virtual machine, while the other's host is a physical machine, XP as well. Thank you.
×