Re: libbsf-java
Hi Robert,
Robert Lougher wrote:
Michael Koch <konqueror <at> gmx.de> writes:
Please don't use jamvm in general. It's only available on i386, powerpc
and arm. It's not ported yet to other archs and Porting to 64-bit archs
is hard due to the 32-bit ugliness in the upstream code.
Better choices are gij, kaffe or sablevm.
And with such ringing endorsements as this I seriously wonder why I spend most
nights and weekends working on JamVM. Of course use the best VM for the job,
but OSS is such a thankless task at the best of times.
For the record, 64-bit support is the next thing on my TODO list -- I've
recently bought an AMD64 machine specifically to do this. I'm currently
finishing off a port to MacOS X which people have been asking for (sadly only
PPC32 because I don't have a G5 machine, but I do have a mortgage). Perhaps
it's time to re-prioritise my evenings and look at the pile of books I never
get time to read.
The statement of better choice is here maybe a bit out of context. gij,
kaffe or sablevm are in the case of using the vm to BUILD a package for
DEBIAN the (normally) only choice. But that has nothing to do with
the quality or fitness for a given task of jamvm at all.
That is just because of the debian policy which states that a package
must be buildable from source on all debian arches. As jamvm is
currently not available on all arches the consequence is that if
I use jamvm for BUILDING my package on i386 and a user / other developer
tries to build it from source on arches without jamvm it will fail and
therefore we get a release critical bug for it.
I myself are really impressed of jamvm ! Keep up the good work !
Regards,
Wolfgang
Reply to: