sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs
- From: toxic AT TheWorld.com
- To: "David Kowis" <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- Cc: SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:30:41 -0500 (EST)
hi,
there's a parameter you can add to startup.sh (or run.sh, depending on
whether you're running tomcat by itself, or with jboss):
'jvm.option=-Djava.awt.headless=true'
or
'-Djava.awt.headless=true'
some version of this will work; check with google for examples with
different j2ee containers. also note that this requires j2sdk1.4
good luck
john
> I know it used to work just fine without an X11. I'd like to have that
> option
> still. I just want to use j2sdk for tomcat. I don't need an X server on my
> pentium 200 testing box. I don't think it's got enough hard drive space
> for it.
> 1.5gb for root. I really don't want to put x11 on there. If there's just a
> simple way to hack it out of the spell, that would be really cool. I
> understand
> that now j2sdk is complete and can build every kind of java program and
> display
> things correctly, but on my servers I don't need to have x11. I do need
> java
> support though, and both of the spells for java need x11.
> Thanks,
> _ ._ _ , _ ._
> (_ ' ( ` )_ .__)
> ( ( ( ) `) ) _)
> (__ (_ (_ . _) _) ,__)
> `~~`\ ' . /`~~`
> ,::: ; ; :::,
> ':::::::::::::::'
> _____________/_ __ \____________
> David Kowis
> Computer Programmer
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
-
[SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/16/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
toxic, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Hamish Greig, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Casey Harkins, 11/17/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs, David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Casey Harkins, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Hamish Greig, 11/28/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/30/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs, Hamish Greig, 11/30/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/30/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
Hamish Greig, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
David Kowis, 11/17/2003
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] j2dsk that doesn't require x11libs,
toxic, 11/17/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.