Re: kaffe-1.1.1 package available for tests
My apologies. We installed a new mail server and I was in a car wreck
shortly after so some configuration issues went unattended. I have built
packages for 1.1.1 for Intel and they seem to work well enough. I need
to verify that I can stop using pthreads. Under 1.0.7 I could not get
ant to spawn external processes when using native threads and therefore
could not use jikes as a compiler.
Additionally, I still question the wisdom of the shared JNI directory.
>From what I understand, there are different versions of JNI and you
cannot count on the idea that all JNI libraries are simply going to work
with all VMs. It's not clear to me that different versions of JNI can
even coexist on a single install with the current arrangement. If
someone can help me see the light on this stuff then I'd be happy to add
the JNI support. Otherwise I'm going to downgrade #167936 to wishlist
and not implement it.
Sorry again for my absentee behavior.
On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 08:10, Stefan Gybas wrote:
> Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > Doesn't a few days seem abnormally short notice for such a major NMU -
> > not a bugfix but an entire new upstream release?
>
> Kaffe has RC bugs which are open for 3 months (not counting your bug
> report about /usr/lib/jni) - all of them either include a patch or are
> easy to fix. Kaffe has been removed from testing because of this and now
> keeps other Java packages (like jikes, see #203054) from moving to testing.
>
> The availability of the new upstream release was reported almost 2
> months ago (with a list of bugs that are fixed by this upstream release)
> and I've sent Ean another mail about a month ago. How much longer should
> we wait?
>
> > The gij interpreter is quite advanced and for me works better than kaffe
> > in almost all cases where I've done a comparison. There is no reason
> > (in most cases) that an out-of-date kaffe should be a bottleneck for
> > packages progressing into main.
>
> People keep telling me that their favourite free JVM works quite well
> but whenever I try this particular JVM it fails running Ant. I have only
> been able to run Ant with Kaffe 1.1 - not with GIJ, not with SableVM. I
> would be very happy to not depend on Kaffe, so if you managed to run Ant
> with GIJ (or SableVM) please tell me how you did it.
>
> > Incidentally, several java packages could move from contrib into main if
> > the maintainers could simply take the time to write their own Makefiles
> > instead of relying on the default ant build system which is in contrib,
> > e.g., #163168. It's a bit of work but it's certainly possible - see
> > jython for an example.
>
> I think changing the upstream build system is a bad idea, see e.g.
> #162426. You need to check each new upstream version for changes and
> sometimes don't notice missing files in JARs. I'd rather get Ant into
> main as I've written in my answer to #163168.
--
_____________________________________________________________________
Ean Schuessler ean@brainfood.com
Brainfood, Inc. http://www.brainfood.com
Reply to: