| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2
Comments:
<0> wlfshmn: oh dear g... I don't think I want to know where this is heading...
<1> Thats how i did it. But why am i getting a black screen?
<1> ?
<1> uhm, focus on the problem?
<1> or the question, rather.
<0> disproportio: Well, gcj is supposed to be a replacement for javac. Its supposed to be a "free compiler" but the truth is that its very incompatible with real Java. Just give it a testrun and you'll soon see for yourself I'm afraid.
<1> Anyone know why its a blackscreen? :/
<1> or it doesnt matter, since i use java as cgi
<0> somerandomgu: your implementation is far from ideal. This is an insane way to do it and is very likely to break. Best approach is either webstart or an application server.
<1> Lion-O: so the reason the screen is black is because of..?
<0> somerandomgu: It could be anything, but I'd blame the implementation first.
<1> Lion-O: why?
<0> somerandomgu: think about it....
<1> Lion-O: Is it because another third party us starting the application and security stuff comes in?
<2> If you're using this to take a screenshot, you're going to have to run the process as something administrative
<0> somerandomgu: As plain application it has access to your graphical screen in order to display the image. How would a cgi do this? NOT in the same way.
<2> If you're firing the thing off as a CGI, it's probably being started as a user such as "nobody" which has 0 permissions on the system for security.
<0> somerandomgu: this approach is simply insane IMO, and anything could be going wrong.
<1> Lion-O: so.. Windows knows its CGI?
<1> Resonator: hm, so.. php and other stuff have admin-privs?
<0> you should ask yourself if you picked the right language for whatever it is you're doing. While cgi might be possible it certainly isn't the most ideal solution. For those cases you're better off with Perl (natively supported by Apache) or perhaps php and the likes.
<1> Lion-O: not sure if PHP or perl can take screenshots tho.
<0> somerandomgu: for that you'd need an applet anyway.
<2> somerandomgu: no..
<0> somerandomgu: if Apache is starting the application it will never make a screenshot of the client box anyway.
<2> somerandomgu: but if you run an application server (such as Tomcat) it can be started to run under an admin user account.
<0> And as Resonator pointed out; the user apache won't be allowed to even access the screen.
<1> so, Apache can moderate application priv?
<1> oh, ok. If i do a "server" which i manually start, and hook apache to it, i might get a screenshot? :)
<2> There ya go.
<1> I didnt know an application could control another application
<2> If you ever want to run Java stuff from the web, you should use a servlet that lives in a servlet container (such as Tomcat or any other Java application server)
<2> somerandomgu: also, Apache doesn't moderate the app privileges. You set that up when you configure the application server as a Windows service.
<2> ***uming you're running in Windows, that is.
<1> Resonator: set what up? the apache?
<3> I don't a Java applet or servlet can take a screenshot of a client system (because of security restrictions), a ActiveX control might do it...
<2> The permissions
<1> However my Java-CGI did have file-access.
<2> netwit: you may be right.
<2> I can't think of a way to do something like that from a Java app. *shrug*
<1> well, you could always create an own http-server that spits out the desktop-image :)
<1> Is Java-CGI worse than a servlet?
<3> I've never heard of Java-CGI...
<2> A servlet *IS* Java-CGI, essentially.
<2> If you must call it that. X.x
<1> netwit: http://localhost.weirdbyte.com/demo.haveaniceday
<1> Resonator: yea, my point exactly. So, basiecally, what i am doing is no worse than a servlet.
<1> or..?
<3> hmmm...
<1> I mean, i can do much cooler stuff this way than i can do with php (which ive been using almost 8 years now).
<4> like what
<1> I can create a java-application that is a website. Cl***es, file-access, OOP, sockets. tbh it sounds good :)
<4> I can do practically anything in PHP I can do in Java
<4> you can do that in PHP
<1> tybalt: true, but php's oop is worse than javas :)
<4> yeah, so?
<4> you just have to work around it and it works fine
<1> i live for oop :)
<4> damn, thats awesom. Good for you.
<1> tybalt: *sigh*
<4> sorry, I enjoy myself quite a lot
<1> So, anyone got an idea of someone cool i can do a Java-CGI-app of? Displaying current screenshot didnt work :/
<0> I doubt that you can do anything usefull like that. Too restrictive anyway.
<4> how about an inteligent poker playing bot
<4> you could make millions
<1> Lion-O: hm, such as?
<0> somerandomgu: Check out an application server and you'll see for yourself.
<1> its hard to think of something Java can do that PHP cant :P
<0> is it? I've never seen PHP run on a mobile phone. But then again, why would it matter anyway. Both have their pro's and con's.
<1> Imeant as a webservice, or webbrelated.
<0> There are plenty of changes, but heck, thats rather moot I think.
<1> changes?
<0> well, differences.
<4> Lion-0, I've run PHP run on my phone
<1> you being a smart*** or serious?
<4> Im serious
<0> tybalt: I'm not saying its impossible, simply that its not common :)
<4> I didn't say its common
<1> acutally, Lion-O said HE has never seen it.
<4> well, shieet
<4> crap, should have emphasised the I, not the E
<5> hi
<5> is there a quick way to cap the input on a jtextfield?
Return to
#java
or
Go to some related
logs:
xtabu
www . golebanese . com
#linux
#linux
#windows
arcadegirls
#skype
#linux
#chatzone
How to do overtake in Quakenet
|
|