Enrico Migliore wrote: > Hi Tim, > >> Enrico Migliore wrote: >> >> >>> Archie, Geir and Stefano, >>> >>> could you please take a look at the following assertion and correct it >>> if it's wrong: >>> >>> It's worth to remember, that the goal of porting JCHEVM to >>> Cygwin/Windows, >>> is to enable us, and the people interested, to have a development >>> environment on Windows, >>> in order to start working on the APR. >>> >> >> I'm not sure what you mean by 'in order to start working on the APR'? >> >> >> > I meant, modifying JCHEVM in order to call, where applicable, the APR > functions. > >>> In principle, after adapting jchevm to the APR, jchevm will be buildable >>> with: >>> >>> 1. GCC native - build on Linux an executable for Linux >>> 2. GCC cross native - build on Linux an executable for Windows >>> (without Cygwin) >>> 3. MSVC native - build on Windows an executable for Windows >>> >>> The same thing applies to the Harmony Classlib >>> >> >> The class library native code uses the Harmony portlib to access much of >> the OS-specific code covered in APR. Rather than rewrite those natives, >> and loose the additional characteristics of the portlib, it would make >> more sense to implement the portlib on APR if that were desirable. >> >> > I think I'm missing something: last week, we all agreed on "adopting" > the APR library for the native > stuff, except for the windowing subsystem. That means to me that all the > functions of JCHEVM and the Harmony, > that need to access an OS/platform service (filesystem, network, etc.) > should call the APR library.
No we didn't agree to do that Enrico, for the reasons I described above. Regards, Tim -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
