On 2014-08-18 16:15, Anthony Petrov wrote:
On 8/18/2014 5:47 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
libawt et al:
The relation between libawt, libawt_headless, libjawt, libawt_xawt
and libawt_lwawt are hairy enough to make my brain curl up. I believe
there are simplifications to be made but I gave up trying to figure them
out.
libawt contains code that is shared between all AWT lib
implementations. Depending on what mode/toolkit is requested, it loads
a specific variant of the awt native library, such as:
- libawt_headless - headless AWT implementation.
- libawt_xawt - XToolkit implementation (uses X11 for GUI)
- libawt_lwawt - CToolkit implementation (uses Cocoa for GUI)
Historically, we were able to choose between lwawt and xawt on Mac in
the past, but we no longer support or even build xawt on Mac. Also, in
the past there was MToolkit (which used Motif for GUI). Again, we no
longer support this toolkit. So, currently we always use xawt on
Linux/Solaris and lwawt on Mac. But since we still need to choose
between a real toolkit and a headless toolkit, we need the common
libawt library.
libjawt is a helper library that implements JAWT API and is loaded by
applications that use the JAWT interface which allows them to get
direct access to the native AWT drawing surface and use native APIs
(e.g. OpenGL) to draw on the surface. This library isn't needed for
regular AWT/Swing applications.
So I'm not sure if the current set of AWT libraries could be
simplified any further.
Hope this helps.
Thank you for the clarification, it was very helpful!
While the set of AWT libraries probably cannot be simplified as you say,
my gut feeling is still that the current layout of files on disk does
not optimally match the actual libraries we build. Armed with the help
of your description, I'll look into them once again and see if I can
make that statement more concrete.
/Magnus
