Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | Welcome to Eclipse overview doesn't work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Eclipse Project] Platform | Reporter: | michael hodgins scjp <michael_hodgins> |
| Component: | User Assistance | Assignee: | Platform-Help-Inbox <platform-help-inbox> |
| Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | ||
| Version: | 3.0.1 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Windows XP | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
|
Description
michael hodgins scjp
Pass a path to a clean installation of jre using -vm command line option From Eclipse readme: Help browser displays a blank page If you see a help launched with a blank page, and no errors displayed, it can be caused by a conflict between libraries in org.eclipse.tomcat plug-in and jars optionally installed in JRE jre/lib/ext directory. To fix the problem, ensure that the JRE used for running Eclipse does not contain any J2EE or Apache jars in the jre/lib/ext directory. (bug 63970) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 63970 *** This isn't a resolution! I'm a jobing Java programmer and can't be expected to have a clean JRE. Eclipse should work in the environment it's installed in, like other IDEs do. Yet again, Eclipse has proven itself to be a waste of my time. Back to a working IDE, in this case NetBeans 4.0. You are welcome. Eclipse is an IDE that does not modify nor needs other things in the jre. Ever get the feeling you're not speaking the same langauge? If you want to use eclipse install another jdk and run eclipse -vm path/to/javaw.exe You can even copy the jre folder under eclipse/ an eclipse.exe will automatically pick it up. Most jobing java programmers have a handful of jdk's installed. In deed, as do I. My point is that Eclipse should work, regardless of what is in my classpath. Netbeans does. It's a shame that my confidence in Eclipse has been reduced, again, to 'an interesting but buggy piece of software'. Michael, it is impossible to ensure that a program works against an unknown modification of a core platform code like JRE. Eclipse tests against widely available and supported JRE/JDK implementations. Once you modify a supported version, all bets are off. Take a look at the following link: http://www.eclipse.org/eclipse/development/eclipse_project_plan_3_1.html It lists the supported platforms for Eclipse 3.1 (and there are plans for previous versions that also list corresponding supported platforms). It essentially means that we commit ourselves to testing on the supported platforms and supported Java implementations on each of them. When you modify JDK/JRE, the modification may or may not affect Eclipse behaviour. Another Java developer may make another modification that does not affect Eclipse but shots down other Java IDEs. Does it mean that they are bad and Eclipse is good? There are many ways to compare Java IDEs, but whether they work when unknown modifications are made to JDKs/JREs is not a legitimate one. I'm still not hearing a resolution. This is only an excuse. What you've said is that Eclipse only works on standard platforms, with no 'modifications' and that other IDE might be the same. What a lot of bull. All I've done is place a random .jar file in my classpath. Eclipse is so fragile that it bums out. I want to make it quite clear here that I understand this, and I understand that Eclipse only supports a number of standard runtime environments. This is not my complaint. I'm more concerned than anything that Eclipse is so fragile and requires such a ridged environment in which to operate. It seems to me that if that is the case, I can't rely on this software. I can't spend time learning and deploying this software. It's too risky. The platform is flawed and I don't know were the flaw will show itself next. And when it does, I can't be confident that the bug will be fixed, based on this experience. I really wanted to try Eclipse (again) but (again) all I have is the feeling that it isn't such a stable platform as what I'm already using (perhaps because it's only tested against a ridged standard runtime), doesn't have a nice, usable, user interface, and has a difficult to navigate website that is full of bloatware. These are of course just my options and I'm well aware that I might sound small headed and completely irreverent of the hard work you guys put into a project that you regard as worthy of respect. Opps, forgive my typo; should be opinions.
> options
|