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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #33665 > unrolled thread

A very dark day indeed :-(

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

Contents

  A very dark day indeed :-( Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-08 19:36 +0800
    Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 08:45 -0500
    Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-08 14:50 +0100
      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 12:37 -0500
      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 12:55 -0500
        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-09 05:39 +0800
          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 17:22 -0500
            Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 17:08 -0800
              Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 20:30 -0500
                Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 18:31 -0800
                  Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 22:02 -0500
                    Re: A very dark day indeed :-( maherrj@googlemail.com - 2016-02-08 20:04 -0800
                      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:18 -0500
                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:55 -0500
                          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 06:32 -0800
                    Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 05:27 -0800
                      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 15:24 +0100
                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 06:38 -0800
                          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 16:00 +0100
                            Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 07:20 -0800
                              Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 16:39 +0100
                                Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 07:50 -0800
                                  Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 17:16 +0100
                                    Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:40 -0500
                                      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 06:28 -0800
                                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 17:21 +0100
                                          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:03 -0500
                                            Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 09:33 +0100
                                              Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 05:32 -0800
                                                Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 15:42 +0100
                                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 21:58 -0500
                            Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2016-02-09 15:59 +0000
                              Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-09 17:24 +0100
                                Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2016-02-09 16:30 +0000
                                  Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 01:47 +0100
                                Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 08:55 -0800
                                  Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 01:59 +0100
                                    Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:48 -0500
                                      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-10 17:35 +0100
                                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:05 -0500
                                          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-02-11 09:39 +0100
                          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:30 -0500
                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:28 -0500
                      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-09 20:27 -0500
                        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 05:27 -0800
                          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-10 22:23 -0500
        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 13:58 -0800
          Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 17:20 -0500
      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2016-02-08 19:44 +0100
        Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-02-08 14:06 -0500
      Re: A very dark day indeed :-( Brixomatic <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 22:39 +0100

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#33665 — A very dark day indeed :-(

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/good-riddance-to-the-java-plugin-20160202-gmk4p4.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#33674

On 2/8/2016 6:36 AM, Richard Maher wrote:
> http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/good-riddance-to-the-java-plugin-20160202-gmk4p4.html

Given that practically all major browsers either have or will remove
support for Java plugin, then the practical impact is very little.

Also note that your article is actually wrong about what Oracle is doing.

It says:

<quote>
On January 27, 2016, Oracle took a major step toward reducing the 
effectiveness of exploit kits and other crimeware when the company 
announced it was pulling the browser plugin from the next desktop 
version of Java – Java JRE 9.
</quote>

But the original source 
https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/entry/moving_to_a_plugin_free 
says:

<quote>
Oracle plans to deprecate the Java browser plugin in JDK 9. This 
technology will be removed from the Oracle JDK and JRE in a future Java 
SE release.
</quote>

deprecate != pull

Arne

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

#33675

Actually, I believe this is good news. Java applets are an outdated and
overaged technology, so time to get rid of it. Oracle killed it
successfully.

What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the
same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all
the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems
and the same issues to begin with.

So why that helps is really not clear to me.

Greetings,
	Thomas

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

#33679

On 2/8/2016 9:04 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> writes:
>> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the
>> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all
>> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems
>> and the same issues to begin with.
>
>    It is true that Java indeed had security defects. But the press decided
>    to make it the scapegoat while no one is allowed to mention the elephant
>    in the room: JavaScript.

Anything allowing code downloaded from the internet to be executed
locally has the potential for having security problems. They depend
on various mechanisms (sandbox, same origin policy etc.) to be
secure. But those mechanisms are implemented in software written by
humans. So they are not perfect.

>    Before I append my usual JavaScript security rant, I'd like to mention
>    that I believe that technically it should be possible to detect applet tags
>    with JavaScript, read the class files in JavaScript and execute them
>    with an JVM written in JavaScript, where a canvas element can be used
>    to actually implement the visible area of the applet. (GWT is already
>    doing something similar.)

Possible, but I doubt performance is good.

But anyone can try it out. It exists.

https://github.com/Jivings/jsJVM

http://plasma-umass.github.io/doppio-demo/

Arne

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

#33681

On 2/8/2016 8:50 AM, Thomas Richter wrote:
> Actually, I believe this is good news. Java applets are an outdated and
> overaged technology, so time to get rid of it. Oracle killed it
> successfully.

I think SUN and Mozilla/Google/Microsoft can also claim part of it.

> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the
> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all
> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems
> and the same issues to begin with.
>
> So why that helps is really not clear to me.

Good question.

Maybe because it prompts differently!?

Arne

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

#33690

On 2/9/2016 1:55 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/8/2016 8:50 AM, Thomas Richter wrote:
>> Actually, I believe this is good news. Java applets are an outdated and
>> overaged technology, so time to get rid of it. Oracle killed it
>> successfully.
>
> I think SUN and Mozilla/Google/Microsoft can also claim part of it.
>
>> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the
>> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all
>> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems
>> and the same issues to begin with.
>>
>> So why that helps is really not clear to me.
>
> Good question.
>
> Maybe because it prompts differently!?
>
> Arne
>
>

My guess was they'd claim web-start forces you to use the latest JVM 
version.

But I agree with Thomas is that web-start won't work in Chrome or Edge.

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

#33693

On 2/8/2016 4:39 PM, Richard Maher wrote:
> On 2/9/2016 1:55 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 2/8/2016 8:50 AM, Thomas Richter wrote:
>>> What I do not understand is how Java applets can be insecure and at the
>>> same time, Java webstart is supposed to be secure. In the end, it's all
>>> the same java virtual machine behind it, with the same security problems
>>> and the same issues to begin with.
>>>
>>> So why that helps is really not clear to me.
>>
>> Good question.
>>
>> Maybe because it prompts differently!?
>>
>
> My guess was they'd claim web-start forces you to use the latest JVM
> version.

No. You can specify what Java version you want in the JNLP.

> But I agree with Thomas is that web-start won't work in Chrome or Edge.

I can run Java Web Start from Chrome.

When I hit a link to JNLP I first need to say OK and then a small option
show up in the bottom where I can chose open, amd then it runs.

Arne

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

#33697

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 6:22:31 AM UTC+8, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> 
> > But I agree with Thomas is that web-start won't work in Chrome or Edge.
> 
> I can run Java Web Start from Chrome.
> 
> When I hit a link to JNLP I first need to say OK and then a small option
> show up in the bottom where I can chose open, amd then it runs.
> 
> Arne

What version of Chrome? Do you have a link to a webstart sight I can test?

Try running this with Chrome 48: -
https://www.java.com/en/download/installed.jsp

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

#33698

On 2/8/2016 8:08 PM, maherrj@googlemail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 6:22:31 AM UTC+8, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> But I agree with Thomas is that web-start won't work in Chrome or Edge.
>>
>> I can run Java Web Start from Chrome.
>>
>> When I hit a link to JNLP I first need to say OK and then a small option
>> show up in the bottom where I can chose open, amd then it runs.
>
> What version of Chrome?

48.0.2564.103

>                         Do you have a link to a webstart sight I can test?

https://www.yworks.com/products/yfiles/demos#java

> Try running this with Chrome 48: -
> https://www.java.com/en/download/installed.jsp

What is the point?

That page contains an applet tag - not a Java Web Start link?

Chrome shows this link:

https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/chrome.xml

And it says:

<quote>
Java applications are offered through web browsers as either a web start 
application (which do not interact with the browser once they are 
launched) or as a Java applet (which might interact with the browser). 
This change does not affect Web Start applications, it only impacts applets.
</quote>

Arne

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

#33700

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 9:30:56 AM UTC+8, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/8/2016 8:08 PM, maherrj@googlemail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 6:22:31 AM UTC+8, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> >>> But I agree with Thomas is that web-start won't work in Chrome or Edge.
> >>
> >> I can run Java Web Start from Chrome.
> >>
> >> When I hit a link to JNLP I first need to say OK and then a small option
> >> show up in the bottom where I can chose open, amd then it runs.
> >
> > What version of Chrome?
> 
> 48.0.2564.103
> 
> >                         Do you have a link to a webstart sight I can test?
> 
> https://www.yworks.com/products/yfiles/demos#java
> 
> > Try running this with Chrome 48: -
> > https://www.java.com/en/download/installed.jsp
> 
> What is the point?
> 
> That page contains an applet tag - not a Java Web Start link?
> 
> Chrome shows this link:
> 
> https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/chrome.xml
> 
> And it says:
> 
> <quote>
> Java applications are offered through web browsers as either a web start 
> application (which do not interact with the browser once they are 
> launched) or as a Java applet (which might interact with the browser). 
> This change does not affect Web Start applications, it only impacts applets.
> </quote>
> 
> Arne

I stand corrected Arne.

But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm wrong) is all your example uses the browser for is downloading the JNLP file? After that your running a desktop app in isolation with nary an awareness that the browser exists.

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

#33704

On 2/8/2016 9:31 PM, maherrj@googlemail.com wrote:
> But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm wrong) is
> all your example uses the browser for is downloading the JNLP file?
> After that your running a desktop app in isolation with nary an
> awareness that the browser exists.

That is correct.

But that is what Java Web Start is really intended for.

You click on a link to a JNLP file with all sorts
of instructions on how to run, Java Web Start check if it
already have Java code in local cache or need to download.

It is an easy way to keep a Java application uptodate at
client PC's.

The .NET equivalent is ClickOnce.

Java Web Start never became a success.

And I think that what most people think about when they hear
Java Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start
is used to run applets.

But that is really only a very special case.

And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then
I would expect this possibility to be dropped together with
classic applet support.

Arne

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

#33707

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 11:02:11 AM UTC+8, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 2/8/2016 9:31 PM, maherrj@googlemail.com wrote:
> > But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm wrong) is
> > all your example uses the browser for is downloading the JNLP file?
> > After that your running a desktop app in isolation with nary an
> > awareness that the browser exists.
> 
> That is correct.

Well that's a complete fucking nonsense then.
 
Java tells HTML5 and the Web in general to "Bugger off! Larry is simply not amused." 

I hope Java manages to retain its server-base but why that necessitated the murder of Java on the client escapes me :-(

> 
> But that is what Java Web Start is really intended for.

No wonder no one used it. But I used to see it injecting an <OBJECT> tag at least at some stage.

> 
> The .NET equivalent is ClickOnce.

Something else I've never heard of.

> 
> Java Web Start never became a success.

And never will.

> 
> And I think that what most people think about when they hear
> Java Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start
> is used to run applets.
> 
> But that is really only a very special case.
> 
> And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then
> I would expect this possibility to be dropped together with
> classic applet support.

Yes that's the sad part.

> 
> Arne

Cheers Richard Maher

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

#33734

On 2/8/2016 11:04 PM, maherrj@googlemail.com wrote:
> I hope Java manages to retain its server-base but why that necessitated the murder of Java on the client escapes me :-(

I don't think it is accurate to say that Oracle is murdering it.

Oracle is running a business, so they produce what customers want.

Demand for Java on desktop and embedded in browser is very.

So in reality the users are telling Oracle to stop investing in it.

Arne

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

#33743

On 2/9/2016 8:34 PM, Stefan Ram wrote:
> =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=c3=b8j?= <arne@vajhoej.dk> writes:
>> Oracle is running a business, so they produce what customers want.
>
>    A rational business produces what is estimated to produce
>    most profit or support their long-term strategic goals
>    (producing more profit in an indirect long-term way) and at
>    the same time fits into their business profile (Oracle will
>    not suddenly produce ice cream, even when there are indeed
>    many people who like ice cream.)
>
>    But not all business are rational. Businesses are lead by
>    humans and a single human business leader sometimes might
>    have irrational / emotional reasons for some business
>    decisions or his decisions might be influenced by lack of
>    knowledge or false beliefs or ill-advising advisors and so on.

That can in some cases drive single company decisions. But I can not
see it drive industry decisions.

>    And look at Apple: Apple (iPod, iPhone, iPad) did /not/ hear
>    to what people want and then produces this. Instead it
>    created products and then made people want them. Before
>    there was an iPhone, nobody was able to say, »I want a
>    iPhone.« because they had no idea that such a thing could
>    exist.

I don't think that is a complete accurate description.

There were plenty of early smartphones attempts (Nokia Communicator,
Windows Mobile, BlackBerry etc.).

Apple increased an existing demand by creating a better product.

>     Before there was Google, people had no idea that
>    they want a search-engine with page rank and snippets on
>    the SERP.

Again the demand for search engine was there. Google created a search
engine that people liked better because it produced better results.

>> Demand for Java on desktop and embedded in browser is very.
>
>    So very very!

I forgot a "low".

Arne

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

#33747

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 8:55:20 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> I don't think that is a complete accurate description.
> 
> There were plenty of early smartphones attempts (Nokia Communicator,
> Windows Mobile, BlackBerry etc.).
> 
> Apple increased an existing demand by creating a better product.

People are constantly trying to invent things first, then convince people they need to buy them.  Recently people have been demanding drones and hoverboards and fitbits and 4k UHD tvs, many things that did not exist just a few years ago.

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

#33716

On Monday, February 8, 2016 at 10:02:11 PM UTC-5, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> > But from what I can see (and please correct me again if I'm wrong) is
> > all your example uses the browser for is downloading the JNLP file?
> > After that your running a desktop app in isolation with nary an
> > awareness that the browser exists.
> 
> That is correct.
> 
You sound very confused.  You tell me "you click on a link, answer yes to run and the Java app starts up".  That "link" you click to start is the file you downloaded.  Then you tell the next guy "That is correct", referring to the fact web start indeed has no connection to the browser, which is why it is not going away like the applets.

> But that is what Java Web Start is really intended for.
> 
> You click on a link to a JNLP file with all sorts
> of instructions on how to run, Java Web Start check if it
> already have Java code in local cache or need to download.
> 
> It is an easy way to keep a Java application uptodate at
> client PC's.
> 
> The .NET equivalent is ClickOnce.
> 
> Java Web Start never became a success.
> 
How so? reference?  I've been using web start, I would guess roughly 8 years now.  You can use it over the web, as in the following link.  I use it for an application that runs on the domain from IIS.  The application runs a server and client program, connecting the 2 JVMs with sockets.

http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/uiswing/examples/components/index.html
Click any "Launch" link to see how web start works.

> And I think that what most people think about when they hear
> Java Web Start is the case where JNLP and Java Web Start
> is used to run applets.
> 
> But that is really only a very special case.
> 
> And even though I have not seen it described anywhere then
> I would expect this possibility to be dropped together with
> classic applet support.
> 
> Arne

reference?  I've never heard of that case, though it sounds more secure than applets started from a browser since you had to run the jnlp and acknowledge the security prompt authorizing the vendor to get there.

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

#33719

On 02/09/2016 02:27 PM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> How so? reference?  I've been using web start, I would guess roughly 8 years now.  You can use it over the web, as in the following link.  I use it for an application that runs on the domain from IIS.  The application runs a server and client program, connecting the 2 JVMs with sockets.
>
> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/uiswing/examples/components/index.html
> Click any "Launch" link to see how web start works.
>

Does nothing for me but a prompt to save a file with a name ending with 
.jnlp and nothing after that. Basic Ubuntu desktop machine with OpenJDK 
8 installed. Same result in Chromium and Firefox.

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

#33720

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 9:24:59 AM UTC-5, Silvio wrote:
> On 02/09/2016 02:27 PM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> > How so? reference?  I've been using web start, I would guess roughly 8 years now.  You can use it over the web, as in the following link.  I use it for an application that runs on the domain from IIS.  The application runs a server and client program, connecting the 2 JVMs with sockets.
> >
> > http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/uiswing/examples/components/index.html
> > Click any "Launch" link to see how web start works.
> >
> 
> Does nothing for me but a prompt to save a file with a name ending with 
> .jnlp and nothing after that. Basic Ubuntu desktop machine with OpenJDK 
> 8 installed. Same result in Chromium and Firefox.

Exactly.  That's how web start works.  That's why it's more secure than applet.  Web start doesn't run from the browser.  It downloads the jnlp needed to start the client application.  You have to have a JRE installed, then run the jnlp file to start it, and it should prompt if you want to allow Java to run a program from that publisher, in this case Oracle.
Try the TreeDemo, and you should get another security prompt when you select a node and it tries to access the web.

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

#33721

On 02/09/2016 03:38 PM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 9:24:59 AM UTC-5, Silvio wrote:
>> On 02/09/2016 02:27 PM, Eric Douglas wrote:
>>> How so? reference?  I've been using web start, I would guess roughly 8 years now.  You can use it over the web, as in the following link.  I use it for an application that runs on the domain from IIS.  The application runs a server and client program, connecting the 2 JVMs with sockets.
>>>
>>> http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/uiswing/examples/components/index.html
>>> Click any "Launch" link to see how web start works.
>>>
>>
>> Does nothing for me but a prompt to save a file with a name ending with
>> .jnlp and nothing after that. Basic Ubuntu desktop machine with OpenJDK
>> 8 installed. Same result in Chromium and Firefox.
>
> Exactly.  That's how web start works.  That's why it's more secure than applet.  Web start doesn't run from the browser.  It downloads the jnlp needed to start the client application.  You have to have a JRE installed, then run the jnlp file to start it, and it should prompt if you want to allow Java to run a program from that publisher, in this case Oracle.
> Try the TreeDemo, and you should get another security prompt when you select a node and it tries to access the web.
>

No, it does not work at all. It is not a security prompt but a plain 
"save file as" dialog I get with any content type my browser does not 
understand. Apart from a saved jnlp file there is nothing I can do from 
there. Never any mention of running a Java application.

Double clicking the file does nothing. Running the "file" command on it 
reveals nothing but the fact that it is an ASCII encoded XML 1.0 file.

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

#33722

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 10:01:05 AM UTC-5, Silvio wrote:
> No, it does not work at all. It is not a security prompt but a plain 
> "save file as" dialog I get with any content type my browser does not 
> understand. Apart from a saved jnlp file there is nothing I can do from 
> there. Never any mention of running a Java application.
> 
> Double clicking the file does nothing. Running the "file" command on it 
> reveals nothing but the fact that it is an ASCII encoded XML 1.0 file.

You have a JRE installed?  You have the jnlp extension associated with Java?

If you get a command prompt and manually pass the file (either using full paths or having the exe and the jnlp in current directory) it should work
>javaws.exe treedemo.jnlp

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

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

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

csiph-web