On 18/09/2014 1:31 PM, John R Pierce [via PostgreSQL] wrote: > On 9/18/2014 10:17 AM, Szymon Guz wrote: > > Does it mean that there should be distributed many jvm.dlls for each > > of the jvm versions? > > jvm.dll is part of the jre, its not a standalone library.
Right, so to recap: each platform will only need one jvm.dll/so library (which you would update over time). You don't need to include one version for Oracle JDK, OpenJDK, GCJ. You'd pick one, and bundle its jvm.dll (I'd suggest going with Oracle's version since it has the best stability/performance story). I don't believe there are any licensing terms/requirements for private JREs beyond limiting which files you redistribute, so from a licensing point of view I think the Postgresql team would find it acceptable. Gili -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Why-isn-t-Java-support-part-of-Postgresql-core-tp5819025p5819529.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - general mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
