Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #8084 > unrolled thread

Is there a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 zigzagdna <zigzagdna@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-16 12:18 -0700
    Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-09-16 14:28 -0700
      Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-19 22:08 -0400
        Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-21 18:24 -0400
          Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-21 20:25 -0400
            Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-21 17:52 -0700
              Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-09-21 18:53 -0700
            Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Jane Doe <jdoe@love.in.d.jungle.invalid> - 2011-09-22 13:13 +0000
              Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-22 08:59 -0400
              Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-22 08:47 -0700
                Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Jane Doe <jdoe@love.in.d.jungle.invalid> - 2011-09-22 21:40 +0000
                  Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-09-22 18:03 -0700
                  Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-09-23 05:51 -0400
            Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-22 09:01 -0400
              Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-09-22 21:23 -0400
                Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-09-23 05:46 -0400
                  Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-07 21:22 -0500
                    Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-11-07 22:20 -0500
                      Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 spk <jhic@speak.invalid> - 2011-11-08 01:32 -0400
                        Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 thoolen <th00len@th0lenbot.thorium> - 2011-11-08 15:56 -0500
                      Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-11-08 06:54 -0800
                        Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-11-08 21:03 -0500
                          Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-11-08 19:11 -0800
    Re: Is there  a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5 Tom <tom400f@gmail.com> - 2011-09-19 17:22 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#8084 — Is there a file limit size of 2GB in JDK 1.5

I am on HP UNIX 11.2 which is 64 bit operating system. I am using JDK
1.5 and using Java's File i/o to write my trace information to a file.
I noticed that even though my program is running, it stopped writing
any more information once trace file became 2GB.

It cannot be HP UNIX limitation which is 64 bit, also file systems
have been set to allow files larger than 2GB. I am surprise that
java's i/o is 32 bit (yes java's version is most likely 32 bit).

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8088

On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:18:16 -0700 (PDT), zigzagdna
<zigzagdna@yahoo.com> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
said :

>It cannot be HP UNIX limitation which is 64 bit, also file systems
>have been set to allow files larger than 2GB. I am surprise that
>java's i/o is 32 bit (yes java's version is most likely 32 bit).

hmm.  Java itself uses longs (64 bits) for file offsets. There is some
native code that java.io. uses to hook into the OS.  It might be
designed for an older 32-bit HP API.  Or it may be that partitions are
old, 32-bit even under the new 64-bit os. You may have to reformat
them to free up 64 bit power.

Try an experiment with C to see if it too has this limit on that
partition.

Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
now.  JDK 1.7 is out.  Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
http://mindprod.com
Your top priority should be fixing bugs. If you carry on development, 
you are just creating more places you will have to search for them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8168

On 9/16/2011 5:28 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:18:16 -0700 (PDT), zigzagdna
> <zigzagdna@yahoo.com>  wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
> said :
>
>> It cannot be HP UNIX limitation which is 64 bit, also file systems
>> have been set to allow files larger than 2GB. I am surprise that
>> java's i/o is 32 bit (yes java's version is most likely 32 bit).
>
> hmm.  Java itself uses longs (64 bits) for file offsets. There is some
> native code that java.io. uses to hook into the OS.  It might be
> designed for an older 32-bit HP API.  Or it may be that partitions are
> old, 32-bit even under the new 64-bit os. You may have to reformat
> them to free up 64 bit power.
>
> Try an experiment with C to see if it too has this limit on that
> partition.
>
> Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
> now.  JDK 1.7 is out.  Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.

HP-UX != Windows

HP-UX Java 1.5 is not obsolete. I don't even think HP has announced an
EOL date. HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.

http://bizsupport2.austin.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c02690385/c02690385.pdf

HP-UX Java 1.7 is not available yet.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8184

On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 9/16/2011 5:28 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
>> Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
>> now. JDK 1.7 is out. Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.
>
> HP-UX != Windows
>
> HP-UX Java 1.5 is not obsolete. I don't even think HP has announced an
> EOL date. HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.

That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8187

On 9/21/2011 6:24 PM, 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
> On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 9/16/2011 5:28 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
>>> Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
>>> now. JDK 1.7 is out. Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.
>>
>> HP-UX != Windows
>>
>> HP-UX Java 1.5 is not obsolete. I don't even think HP has announced an
>> EOL date. HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>
> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.

It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
vendor on HP-UX.

Which is the relevant facts.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8191

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
>> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> Roedy Green wrote:
>>>> Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
>>>> now. JDK 1.7 is out. Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.
>>>
>>> HP-UX != Windows
>>>
>>> HP-UX Java 1.5 is not obsolete. I don't even think HP has announced an
>>> EOL date. HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>
>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.
> 
> It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
> vendor on HP-UX.
> 
> Which is the relevant facts.

Oracle has declared only their own version of Java 5 obsolete.  Other vendors are free to do otherwise.  Arne is, as usual, correct.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8192

On 9/21/2011 5:52 PM, Lew wrote:
> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
>>> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> Roedy Green wrote:
>>>>> Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
>>>>> now. JDK 1.7 is out. Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.
>>>>
>>>> HP-UX != Windows
>>>>
>>>> HP-UX Java 1.5 is not obsolete. I don't even think HP has announced an
>>>> EOL date. HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>>
>>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.
>>
>> It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
>> vendor on HP-UX.
>>
>> Which is the relevant facts.
>
> Oracle has declared only their own version of Java 5 obsolete.  Other vendors are free to do otherwise.  Arne is, as usual, correct.
>

Oracle's "Java for Business" still provides extended support for 1.4,
until Feb 2013, and 5.0, until May 2014. See
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html

Of course, people answering questions here can make their own choices
about which versions they wish to discuss.

Patricia

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8199

Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>, wrote:

>On 9/21/2011 6:24 PM, 
>supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
>> On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 9/16/2011 5:28 PM, Roedy Green wrote:
>>>> Consider that Java 1.5 has been declared obsolete for quite some time
>>>> now. JDK 1.7 is out. Try your code with 1.7 and see how it works.
>>>
>>> HP-UX != Windows
>>>
>>> HP-UX Java 1.5 is not obsolete. I don't even think HP has announced an
>>> EOL date. HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>
>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.
>
>It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
>vendor on HP-UX.
>
>Which is the relevant facts.
>
>Arne

You ever find Derbysire (Seamus) being solid on Fact?
I will save you the keystrokes.

No.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8200

On 22/09/2011 9:13 AM, "Jane Doe", an obvious murphy sock, wrote:
NaN> Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer

NaN> You ever find Derbysire (Seamus) being solid on Fact?

Who is "Derbyshire (Seamus)", murphy? There is nobody in this newsgroup 
using that alias.

NaN> I will save you the keystrokes.

What does your classic erroneous presupposition that you're saving 
people keystrokes by adding one more off-topic article for them to mark 
read or hit control-K on have to do with Java, murphy?

NaN> No.

What does your denial have to do with Java, murphy?

    "I had 'volunteered (years back) to support those who do endeavor
     to provide free Free Usenet access, support those who offered
     subscription based Free Usenet access, nothing more than
     cooperation expected in return for what has been many
     thousands of hours of work. I note most of those I joined with
     are either deceased, severely disabled, or plain ole' MIA..
     now it is my Time. ...

     You just read my last. ...

     For those who think they see me in future times I can only wish
     you severe Tinnitus in your dreams. For those who know me
     well (eMail, whatever) and see me, know I will be smiling also.
     It is to you I say "adieu mein frenz and adios .. grazie' [hugs]
     for all the Good Times! May you and yours always bear well
     with all Life brings you".

     /0ut"
       --murphy

http://www.uffnet.com/kookkamp/goodbye.htm

And people wonder why I call them Famous Last Words.

P.S. You forgot to include a copy of your famous paranoid "Lits o' Haet" 
in your post, murphy. Still suffering from memory problems, murphy?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8208

Jane Doe wrote:
> You ever find Derbysire (Seamus) being solid on Fact?
> I will save you the keystrokes.
> 
> No.

Please stay on topic here, and take your personal vendettas elsewhere.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8218

Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>, wrote:

>Jane Doe wrote:
>> You ever find Derbysire (Seamus) being solid on Fact?
>> I will save you the keystrokes.
>> 
>> No.
>
>Please stay on topic here, and take your personal vendettas elsewhere.

I can appreciate your point.
However from what I have witnessed first hand you (particularly)
are not mature enough in the Usenet sense to apply that same advice
to the posts Derbyshire leads you "up the garden path" with.
Even when you *know* his posts contains factual mistakes you 
grant the post credibility by an exchange which implies the 
disagreement is up for discussion.
You ignore the other choice.
Tell him to fuck off. Or ignore the post.
That's "maturity" in dealing with the Usenet child.

Like, how many times is it required to *show* Derbyshire
is running multiple names in cljp?
Programmers are that dense?
Or just you?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8224

On Thursday, September 22, 2011 2:40:08 PM UTC-7, Jane Doe wrote:
> Lew <lewb...@gmail.com>, wrote:
> 
> >Jane Doe wrote:
> >> You ever find Derbysire (Seamus) being solid on Fact?
> >> I will save you the keystrokes.
> >> 
> >> No.
> >
> >Please stay on topic here, and take your personal vendettas elsewhere.
> 
> I can appreciate your point.
> However from what I have witnessed first hand you (particularly)
> are not mature enough in the Usenet sense to apply that same advice
> to the posts Derbyshire leads you "up the garden path" with.

Plonk.

-- 
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8232

On 22/09/2011 5:40 PM, "Jane Doe", an obvious murphy sock, wrote:
NaN> Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer

NaN> I can appreciate your point.

What does your classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim have to do 
with Java, murphy? You have never shown any capacity for "appreciating" 
any "point" involving your messages being off-topic or in other ways 
unwelcome or violating of social norms, murphy, as evidenced by the 
slimy trail of gigabytes of off-topic paranoid blather, punctuated by 
occasional flamewars, that you have left all over Usenet like some giant 
radiation-mutated snail.

NaN> However from what I have witnessed first hand you (particularly)
NaN> are not mature enough in the Usenet sense to apply that same advice
NaN> to the posts Derbyshire leads you "up the garden path" with.

Who is "Derbyshire", murphy? There is nobody in this newsgroup using 
that alias.

NaN> Even when you *know* his posts contains factual mistakes you
NaN> grant the post credibility by an exchange which implies the
NaN> disagreement is up for discussion.

How ironic, seeing as your posts contain numerous factual mistakes, 
expressed and implied.

NaN> You ignore the other choice.
NaN> Tell him to fuck off. Or ignore the post.

How ironic, coming from someone who seems to be incapable himself of 
ignoring the same posts.

NaN> That's "maturity" in dealing with the Usenet child.

Who is "the Usenet child", murphy? There is nobody in this newsgroup 
using that alias.

NaN> Like, how many times is it required to *show* Derbyshire
NaN> is running multiple names in cljp?

Who is "Derbyshire", murphy? There is nobody in this newsgroup using 
that alias.

NaN> Programmers are that dense?

It isn't a sign of density when someone disbelieves or disregards you, 
murphy. In fact, it is a sign of density when someone listens to you and 
takes what you said seriously, murphy.

NaN> Or just you?

What does your question of Bloch have to do with Java, murphy?

    "I had 'volunteered (years back) to support those who do endeavor
     to provide free Free Usenet access, support those who offered
     subscription based Free Usenet access, nothing more than
     cooperation expected in return for what has been many
     thousands of hours of work. I note most of those I joined with
     are either deceased, severely disabled, or plain ole' MIA..
     now it is my Time. ...

     You just read my last. ...

     For those who think they see me in future times I can only wish
     you severe Tinnitus in your dreams. For those who know me
     well (eMail, whatever) and see me, know I will be smiling also.
     It is to you I say "adieu mein frenz and adios .. grazie' [hugs]
     for all the Good Times! May you and yours always bear well
     with all Life brings you".

     /0ut"
       --murphy

http://www.uffnet.com/kookkamp/goodbye.htm

And people wonder why I call them Famous Last Words.

P.S. You forgot to include a copy of your famous paranoid "Lits o' Haet" 
in your post, murphy. Still suffering from memory problems, murphy?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8201

On 21/09/2011 8:25 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
>> On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>
>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.
>
> It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
> vendor on HP-UX.

Which just means that that vendor is behind the times. Of course, since 
it's a proprietary Unix vendor, that's hardly surprising.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8229

On 9/22/2011 9:01 AM, 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
> On 21/09/2011 8:25 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
>>> On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>>
>>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5 isn't.
>>
>> It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
>> vendor on HP-UX.
>
> Which just means that that vendor is behind the times. Of course, since
> it's a proprietary Unix vendor, that's hardly surprising.

No.

It is completely standard that server vendors support
a Java version for more years than SUN/Oracle supports the free
version.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8231

On 22/09/2011 9:23 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 9/22/2011 9:01 AM,
> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
> wrote:
>> On 21/09/2011 8:25 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
>>>> On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>>>
>>>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5
>>>> isn't.
>>>
>>> It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
>>> vendor on HP-UX.
>>
>> Which just means that that vendor is behind the times. Of course, since
>> it's a proprietary Unix vendor, that's hardly surprising.
>
> No.

Yes.

> It is completely standard that server vendors support
> a Java version for more years than SUN/Oracle supports the free
> version.

It may be completely standard, but it is also the case that Java 1.5 is 
outdated and lacking in numerous features and other enhancements that 
are found in Java 6 and Java 7. HP should really migrate to Java 7 in 
preference to supporting Java 1.5.

But ultimately it's their (inferred) lack of support for Java 7, rather 
than their support for 1.5, that is at issue.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9763

On 9/23/2011 5:46 AM, 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
> On 22/09/2011 9:23 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 9/22/2011 9:01 AM,
>> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
>> wrote:
>>> On 21/09/2011 8:25 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
>>>>> On 19/09/2011 10:08 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>>> HP-UX Java 1.4.2 will be obsolete May 1st 2012.
>>>>>
>>>>> That just means that HP-UX is behind the times, not that Java 1.5
>>>>> isn't.
>>>>
>>>> It means that Java 1.5 is not obsolete and fully supported by the
>>>> vendor on HP-UX.
>>>
>>> Which just means that that vendor is behind the times. Of course, since
>>> it's a proprietary Unix vendor, that's hardly surprising.
>>
>> No.
>
> Yes.
>
>> It is completely standard that server vendors support
>> a Java version for more years than SUN/Oracle supports the free
>> version.
>
> It may be completely standard, but it is also the case that Java 1.5 is
> outdated and lacking in numerous features and other enhancements that
> are found in Java 6 and Java 7. HP should really migrate to Java 7 in
> preference to supporting Java 1.5.

I would assume HP knows more about their customers needs than you.

> But ultimately it's their (inferred) lack of support for Java 7, rather
> than their support for 1.5, that is at issue.

The issue you raised was about Java 1.5.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9769

On 07/11/2011 9:22 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 9/23/2011 5:46 AM,
> supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations
> wrote:
>> It may be completely standard, but it is also the case that Java 1.5 is
>> outdated and lacking in numerous features and other enhancements that
>> are found in Java 6 and Java 7. HP should really migrate to Java 7 in
>> preference to supporting Java 1.5.
>
> I would assume HP knows more about their customers needs than you.

Unless their customers are very unusual (some sort of nouveau-Amish that 
decided to freeze their technology level at 2002 or something?), then 
it's pretty much a given that they want (at least the option of) the 
latest and greatest.

This is much as if HP were shipping computers running Windows 98 instead 
of Vista and/or Windows 7. It doesn't matter if they keep supporting it 
-- Microsoft isn't anymore, and is the software's ultimate source, and 
furthermore the world has largely moved on, making compatibility an 
issue; and Windows 98 is unstable and full of bugs and security holes 
that a) are by now very widely known and b) are fixed in newer versions 
of Windows.

I doubt you'd think it at all sensible for HP to ship computers running 
Windows 98 and refuse to support any newer version of Windows, even if 
they provided support for the obsolescent version they did ship. So why 
do you think differently when it's obsolescent versions of the JRE and JDK?

>> But ultimately it's their (inferred) lack of support for Java 7, rather
>> than their support for 1.5, that is at issue.
>
> The issue you raised was about Java 1.5.

Obviously not, since I just explicitly said that it's lack of support 
for Java 7 that's the (greater?) sin.

P.S. What got it into your head to drag this old, settled argument back 
up out of the group's archive months later and suddenly start disputing 
things again? Did you get bored and decide we needed a good 
old-fashioned flamewar around here to make things entertaining or 
something? Because I'm sure you're aware that the group's expressed 
purpose is neither flamage nor your personal entertainment but 
good-faith discussion of Java programming...also, you chose the wrong 
person to try to pick a fight with. If you want a descent into serious 
incivility, without being seen as the one to descend to that level first 
yourself, I won't oblige. I'd suggest you take Twisted's name in vain, 
but even he has apparently mellowed out; I doubt you'd get more of a 
rise out of him these days than a polite, but firm, "none of the nasty 
things are true" type of response. :) (But please don't even try it. I 
don't think we would benefit by the group being disrupted with a 
flamewar or a serious attempt to provoke one.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9775

Paul Derbyshire wrote:

>things are true" type of response. :) (But please don't even try it. I 
>don't think we would benefit by the group being disrupted with a 
>flamewar or a serious attempt to provoke one.)

..  seriously _you_ "we"[sic] threatening a "flamewar"[sic]
How many hands have you got - sock free?

Do not begin what you cannot finish, Paul.
One name per newsgroup.

Flames are old bait to you. 
http://tinyurl.com/8xe5bpy
Display any maturity or even a different stroke.
Whatever, your shtick grows very old very fast.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9785

On 08/11/2011 12:32 AM, "spk", an obvious murphy sock, wrote:
NaN> Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer

NaN> Paul Derbysh!re wrote:

What does your unsubstantiated claim regarding 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations's 
name have to do with Java, murphy?

NaN> ..  seriously _you_ "we"[sic] threatening a "flamewar"[sic]

Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, murphy? He clearly 
stated his *refusal* to get into a flamewar with Vajhøj, murphy.

NaN> How many hands have you got - sock free?

What does your non sequitur question of 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations 
have to do with Java, murphy?

NaN> Do not begin what you cannot finish, Paul.

Who is "Paul", murphy? There is nobody in this newsgroup using that alias.

NaN> One name per newsgroup.

What does your ironic demand of 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations, 
posted with the 27th nym you've used so far in this newsgroup, have to 
do with Java, murphy?

NaN> Flames are old bait to you.

What does your unsubstantiated claim regarding 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations 
have to do with Java, murphy?

What does your URL have to do with Java, murphy?

NaN> Display any maturity or even a different stroke.

How ironic.

NaN> Whatever, your shtick grows very old very fast.

How ironic.

    "I had 'volunteered (years back) to support those who do endeavor
     to provide free Free Usenet access, support those who offered
     subscription based Free Usenet access, nothing more than
     cooperation expected in return for what has been many
     thousands of hours of work. I note most of those I joined with
     are either deceased, severely disabled, or plain ole' MIA..
     now it is my Time. ...

     You just read my last. ...

     For those who think they see me in future times I can only wish
     you severe Tinnitus in your dreams. For those who know me
     well (eMail, whatever) and see me, know I will be smiling also.
     It is to you I say "adieu mein frenz and adios .. grazie' [hugs]
     for all the Good Times! May you and yours always bear well
     with all Life brings you".

     /0ut"
       --murphy

http://www.uffnet.com/kookkamp/goodbye.htm

And some people wonder why I call them Famous Last Words.

P.S. You forgot to include a copy of your trademarked Lits o' Haet, 
murphy. Still suffering from memory problems, murphy?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web