Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 92261 invoked from network); 31 Oct 2006 21:13:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 31 Oct 2006 21:13:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 43774 invoked by uid 500); 31 Oct 2006 21:13:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 43734 invoked by uid 500); 31 Oct 2006 21:13:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 43725 invoked by uid 99); 31 Oct 2006 21:13:59 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:13:59 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.5 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of gshimansky@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.186 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.186] (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.186) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:13:47 -0800 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id m18so412308nfc for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:13:26 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=NjLzUhiEAHuCPRJk3WIXqMXyUwb3C6aO1OSJI4fZtmiiGAo0R40/gUeBV3/dMrP9x+zB+CYNvELhXVxvu6kXWhbNX4xCLyPHEKoGrOkpZfqUzutdrw7Sip5+poMicZiwYQfTZTMfokn2/KswtP/ldxKmKEvRWvTp0Z2FvbMLYf4= Received: by 10.49.68.6 with SMTP id v6mr2212857nfk.1162329205964; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:13:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from ppp85-140-252-229.pppoe.mtu-net.ru ( [85.140.252.229]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a23sm3545685nfc.2006.10.31.13.13.24; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:13:25 -0800 (PST) From: Gregory Shimansky Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [classlib][IBMVME]the return value of java.exe Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 00:13:22 +0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <211709bc0610291903i29eb7be2yd91e4a47dcd89933@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200611010013.22808.gshimansky@gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tuesday 31 October 2006 16:39 Evgueni Brevnov wrote: > My experiments show that System.exit() terminate the whole process on > RI not only running VM. Do we all agree this is how it should work? > Does this affect embedded VMs in a negative way? I think that any process that runs JVM in itself and doesn't want to be killed by its System.exit call can use SecurityManager to make it throw SecurityException. I am quite sure that's what a java applet will get if it tries to use System.exit. -- Gregory Shimansky, Intel Middleware Products Division