[izpack-users] Shortcut Panel creates an EMPTY file as ashortcut

Bartz, Klaus Klaus.Bartz at coi.de
Fri Oct 27 10:12:02 CEST 2006

Hi Yurii,

>-----Original Message-----
>From: izpack-users-bounces at lists.berlios.de
>[mailto:izpack-users-bounces at lists.berlios.de]On Behalf Of J-Pro
>Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 7:37 PM
>To: izpack-users at lists.berlios.de
>Subject: Re: [izpack-users] Shortcut Panel creates an EMPTY file as
>Good afternoon, Klaus.
>Thanks for testing for me. 

No problem, I have so much time that I can test snippets from
others which have no lust to do it self.

>I've just tried the exact example I sent you and 

after all now...

>it worked with me too. 

Oh, have I tested right.

>In the case when it didn't work, there was different only name, 
>it contained symbols ':' and ' '. And it contained more symbols. 

Yes, "only". Nobody knows that file names on Windows have not to contain 
Why does nobody see the error box from explorer if he tries to change
a name to some contains it? Because nobody do it.
Additional nobody knows that a part of the representation of a shortcut
is a file. But why should the common rule also apply to such special

>So it was this way:  "...... <shortcut os="windows"  name="JPR: Jennys 
>Permanent Reconnector" ..... ". Sorry I didn't write it to you 
>from the very start... it's just a commercial project and I signed an 
>important contract "to not tell anybody.... blah, blah, blah...". Sorry again.

And we know that there are boobies like me which gaves support for
such things... I hope I have generated much money for you.

>Please, try this example. I wonder if there is no bugs with 
>long name or ':' 
>and ' ' symbols.

I am happy that you allow me to test for you. Thanks. I have
not to test to know that you are not right and therefore you
can wonder.

>Now I'm fine with shortcuts, really thanks for your help.

I will be happy if I can solve your next problem.


As clarification: 
I have no problem if someone uses IzPack for a commercial 
project. I do it also.
I have no problem if someone sends us a snippet which contains
a oversight.
I have no problem if someone changes the code to fog internal
things because this is an open list; but he/she has to test
the changed code.

I have a little problem if someone means he/she can use IzPack
for learning java.

I have a big problem if someone sends us snippet which 
contains changed code, but where never tested in that
occurrence. Then I get the feeling I am a worker for free
for him. That's not the idea of free software.

>izpack-users mailing list
>izpack-users at lists.berlios.de

More information about the izpack-users mailing list