Re: libbsf-java
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 02:39:19PM +0000, 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.
You totally misunderstood me. I only meant for building the package. We
need predictable build system that uses the same software on each arch.
Using one VM on some archs and another VM on other archs is no solution
for the predictable build problem. At runtime users can use the VM
whatever they want. I apologize if my original mail was so unclear. I
use jamvm as my main VM on i386 and powerpc. I'm really happy with it.
> 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.
Thats reallyu great news.
Michael
--
Java Trap: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html
Reply to: