Alexey Varlamov wrote:
Looks like sending my reply failed, here is a second try:
I'm not sure I catch up what you mean, about Emma, Harmony's current
test coverage exclude list[1] shows that not all classes can be
instrumented, I don't think it is due to the position of kernel classes.
Paulex,
I'm sorry for causing confusion - I was a bit wrong. I experienced
troubles with complete overriiding via "-Xbootclasspath:" argument,
and just prepending "-Xbootclasspath/p:" works OK. Not all kernel
classes are instrumented due to dependencies in instrumentation code
itself, this is of course different thing.
Agreed.
Further, for the special requirement(instrument, AOP, or so), anything
prevent the user to add "-Xbootclasspath/p" to replace the kernel class
implementation? Or, what's the difference on this between RI and current
Harmony?
So the difference is that for "-Xbootclasspath:", launcher+j9 always
stealthily prepend luni-kernel.jar to user-specified bootclasspath,
while RI allows fully custom bootclasspath.
This is interesting. Yes, I think we should handle it, although it
probably won't work to replace the kernel class implementation due to
the VM dependency, we have no reason forbidding user to do this.
Just had a look at how the normal bootclasspath(luni.jar, text.jar...)
is processed, the interesting thing is they are loaded by JNI_OnLoad of
hyluni.dll(libhyluni.so), with the source codes located in
modules/luni/src/native/luni/shared/luniglob.c (It is interesting
because I thought it was in launcher, but maybe the original author had
similar issues to get the absolute path of jre/lib/boot). And it takes a
straightforward way to handle the "-Xbootclasspath": if this argument is
passed in command line, just give up parsing the default bootclasspath.
I have two thoughts on this:
1. If this is acceptable, we can deal with kernel class in similar way.
2. Supposing we can have better solution to locate the jre path, is
there any chance to merge the both bootclasspath handling(kernel and
normal) to launcher, so that it doesn't need to deal with bootclasspath
twice?
Or any other proposals?
--
Alexey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Paulex Yang
China Software Development Lab
IBM
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
