From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10322 invoked by alias); 3 Oct 2006 16:55:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 10313 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Oct 2006 16:55:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:55:16 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k93GtEwA021982 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 12:55:15 -0400 Received: from zebedee.littlepinkcloud.COM (vpn-14-79.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.79]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k93Gt9v7015343; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 12:55:10 -0400 Received: from littlepinkcloud.COM (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zebedee.littlepinkcloud.COM (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k93Gt7gM029641; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 17:55:08 +0100 Received: (from aph@localhost) by littlepinkcloud.COM (8.13.6/8.13.5/Submit) id k93Gt7E9029638; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 17:55:07 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17698.38378.993886.203823@zebedee.pink> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 16:55:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley To: David Daney Cc: java-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gbenson@redhat.com Subject: Re: FYI: Win32 InetAddress fix (really) In-Reply-To: <45227D4F.1000906@avtrex.com> References: <4520BD9B.8070802@gmx.ch> <20061002105534.GB4239@redhat.com> <20061003103525.GC6967@redhat.com> <45227D4F.1000906@avtrex.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q4/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 David Daney writes: > Gary Benson wrote: > > + // Some soon-to-be-removed native code synchronizes on this. > > + loopbackAddress = LOCALHOST; > > + } > > + catch (UnknownHostException e) > > + { > > + throw new RuntimeException("should never happen", e); > > + } > > > Would it be better to throw an InternalError here rather than > RuntimeException? If it truly should never happen then it would be an > InternalError if it did. If it can happen, then it should be of some > type the describes the problem. AFAICR this is the kind of thing that happens if the IP address of the loopback interface doesn't have a resolvable name, Andrew.