This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libgcj/13011] gij -jar simple.jar generates: Exception during runtime initialization
- From: "andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 4 Jan 2004 21:30:08 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libgcj/13011] gij -jar simple.jar generates: Exception during runtime initialization
- References: <20031111200032.13011.andreast@gcc.gnu.org>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-04 21:30 -------
Some further comments from Zurich :)
The modified simple.jar with the sun java:
[titanium:libjava/testsuite/libjava.jar] andreast% java -jar simple.jar
hi
The original one:
[titanium:libjava/testsuite/libjava.jar] andreast% java -jar simple.orig
Exception in thread "main" java.io.IOException: invalid manifest format
at java.util.jar.Manifest.read(Manifest.java:186)
at java.util.jar.Manifest.<init>(Manifest.java:52)
at java.util.jar.JarFile.getManifest(JarFile.java:148)
And here the diff of the MANIFEST:
damn, I can't diff!
Binary files META-INF/MANIFEST.MF and META-INF.new/MANIFEST.MF differ
old:
Manifest-Version: 1.0
Created-By: 0.92-gcc
Main-Class: simple
^@
new:
Manifest-Version: 1.0
Created-By: 0.92-gcc
Main-Class: simple
So, I'm not sure who is the guilty one, either the fastjar or fastjar. Since it
fails with the sun one too I'd say fastjar.
I'd have a patch. Simply replace the simple.jar with one that contains a valid
MANIFEST.
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed|2003-12-19 06:41:00 |2004-01-04 21:30:07
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13011