09 Aug 2006 11:49:35 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
sorry for my being sooo late. Busy as always. I am tryin try to be faster :)
On the 0x1BA day of Apache Harmony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am sorry so late to reply.
en, i use command
EM: compile start:[JET n=1816]
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
Hi,
We have commented out all the stack trace handling code etc. in the NT
exception handing code in drlvm to get the same binary image to run on an
old OS like W2K. I am sorry, but I disagree with this approach.
Why? We wanted to make it so a user could try it out.
Richard Liang wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Does the site build things correctly now?
I was trying to make something useful happen, and it doesn't work in
Eclipse 3.2
It seems that the URL should be
Andrew Zhang wrote:
But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
java.io.CharConversionException.
I think it's OK to throw Harmony-implement subclass of
We don't have such a JIRA category:
If we decide to follow RI, we will raise an Non-bug differences from
Spec JIRA.
Do you really need the section starting:
We consider RI is compliant with the Java Specification, if RI...
Regards,
Tim
Richard Liang wrote:
Hello All,
I'd like to update
I think that as long as the spec says throws java.x.Y, and we throw a
java.x.Y (or an o.a.h subclass of java.x.Y) then that meets the spec.
I think the wording could be clearer though; for example, the 'public
superclass' is almost certainly meant to be 'an exception in the
standard Java class
Ive just tried this on my Win XP SP2 machine and all test run through fine
for me.
The Access is denied error sounds symptomatic of another process holding
onto the file and blocking your test run. Are there any other java processes
hanging around that might be causing problems?
Tim Ellison
2006/8/9, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
java.io.CharConversionException.
I think it's
On the 0x1C0 day of Apache Harmony Alexey Varlamov wrote:
09 Aug 2006 11:49:35 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
sorry for my being sooo late. Busy as always. I am tryin try to be faster :)
On the 0x1BA day of Apache Harmony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am sorry so late to
So you can completely delete the VME from your workspace (remove the default
directory), unpack the zip again and recreate the problem?
Regards,
Oliver
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
I use WinXP SP2 too
I have two workspaces one on a local drive and one on a network drive.
Usually I use network
Vladimir Gorr wrote:
On 8/8/06, Oliver Deakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is one module (rmi2) that uses this property yet.
So it's prematurely to applaud :-).
Is there a reason why rmi2 cannot be moved up to 5.0 as well?
Regards,
Oliver
Thanks,
Vladimir.
Reports are that this code
I've completly removed not only VME but the whole workspace,
restarted machine and reproduced the problem
I'll try to create different project and check
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/8/9, Oliver Deakin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So you can completely delete the VME from your workspace (remove the default
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/8/9, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
Tim Ellison wrote:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
But there are some cases that RI throws an implementation specific
exception, we shall throw its public superclass. e.g., If RI throws
sun.io.MalformedInputException, we shall throw
java.io.CharConversionException.
I think it's OK to throw
Seems like it isn't related to the new VM - I see similar error message
on svn move.
But the problem with running the tests disappeared :)
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/8/9, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've completly removed not only VME but the whole workspace,
restarted machine and reproduced
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Seems like it isn't related to the new VM - I see similar error message
on svn move.
But the problem with running the tests disappeared :)
So all tests pass on your machine now?
Regards,
Oliver
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/8/9, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've
Mikhail,
How do you solve the problem?
I have the same error on my machine (Win XP SP2).
Thanks,
Vladimir.
On 8/9/06, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems like it isn't related to the new VM - I see similar error message
on svn move.
But the problem with running the tests
Why not mark the old one as Deprecated, or better still fix up the
references to the old version and delete it.
Regards,
Tim
Stepan Mishura wrote:
Hi Jimmy,
I expect that we agreed to use new serialization framework for new tests.
But I see that people continue develop tests for
Alex Blewitt wrote:
I think that as long as the spec says throws java.x.Y, and we throw a
java.x.Y (or an o.a.h subclass of java.x.Y) then that meets the spec.
Yes. That really complies with the spec. But for Harmony, Complying with
spec is not enough. What we are aiming is that user
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Can anybody reproduce the problem on linux?
Looking.
what is the linux used in these builds?
$ uname -srv
Linux 2.6.16.20-c1 #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jun 12 21:18:00 BST 2006
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
I have to admit I don't understand that logic completely. I can run a
swing app if I have java. For an eclipse plug in I need eclipse too..
The console was designed in MVC style, so it should be relatively easy
to implement the additional Swing/AWT view for it if there are any
volunteers.
As
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Can anybody reproduce the problem on linux?
The build fails for me. Did this checkin[1] change the machine
prerequisites?
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrevision=430015
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
Behavior of Harmony Bidi implementation differs from RI when Bidi is
created with flag parameter more then 61 According spec flag should be
a combination of predefined constants and 62 is invalid value.
I filed this issue as non-bug difference. Does anybody have objection?
2006/8/9, Denis
I thought it should not make any changes for 32-bit, it passed on my
linux RH and SLES...
I'll roll back the changes and see
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/8/9, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Can anybody reproduce the problem on linux?
The build fails for me. Did this
RI java.security.MessageDigest.update() doesn't check input parameters
if they are negative, but Harmony does and throw IAE for next code
MessageDigest.getInstance(SHA).update(new byte[] {2,2}, 0, -100);
MessageDigest.getInstance(SHA).update(new byte[] {2,2}, -100, 57);
Spec doesn't mention
Denis,
I think this Harmony behavior contradicts the spec:
getLength()
Return the length of text in the line.
So, it should return 16 despite the fact Bidi cannot interpret the flags
parameter correctly.
Have you tried this test with some RTL text?
Regards,
--
Alexey A. Ivanov
Intel
I maintain two installations of win2k sp4 - at home and at my
mother-in-law's home. And I run Harmony classlib + j9 periodically on
the one of it.
Regards,
2006/8/8, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2006/8/8, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/8/8, Geir
(hence the check for .svn as proposed on the list recently)
Sorry, it seems I have missed that discussion.
Alexei
2006/8/9, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Alexei Zakharov wrote:
Hi,
I am unable to build the luni module after this commit. Am I right
that the command line svn client is now
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
Geir,
Certainly we can support w2k if we choose to. But I think that the right
way to do this is to implement, build and test for W2K, not by disabling
code that will not run on it by trying to support a single binary image
across OS's. The DRLVM code has not been
Cute, btw :)
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
Alexei Zakharov wrote:
Hi,
I am unable to build the luni module after this commit. Am I right
that the command line svn client is now a requirement? Currently I use
TortoiseSVN client, a graphical one.
It should not be a requirement - my goal was to
Alexei Zakharov wrote:
I have to admit I don't understand that logic completely. I can run a
swing app if I have java. For an eclipse plug in I need eclipse too..
The console was designed in MVC style, so it should be relatively easy
to implement the additional Swing/AWT view for it if
-Original Message-
From: Denis Kishenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 5:39 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [jira] Created: (HARMONY-1116) [classlib][text]
Bidi.getLength() result differs from RI when flag 61
Alexey,
Seems you are
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something here, but we 'support' what ever code we
have in our SVN. If somebody wants to work on the code to make it good
for W2K, or Win95, or WinCE ... then why not? Would we really say 'no'?
I agree that we may have more than
On 9 August 2006 at 13:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: tellison
Date: Wed Aug 9 06:33:00 2006
New Revision: 430050
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=430050view=rev
Log:
Don't stop building if svn info is unavailable.
Modified:
Folks,
Once we decided that we do not want to limit Harmony with only one VM/JIT/GC
instance I think it's time to start discussion how all these components will
work together effectively.
So the proposal is to discuss helper inlining interface.
Every component we have (VM, GC : ) can have
(I replied to the build failure message earlier but for some reason my
message has been lost/delayed - probably a local problem.)
Basically, with HARMONY-1005, classlib doesn't seem to build using gcc
3.3.5 and binutils 2.15 (which are the defaults with Debian's stable
release).
Upgrading to
Just saw your note after committing a further tweak.
I thought the same thing, but did it in a slightly different way. We
could play like this for hours :-)
Hopefully this fixes it for Alexei. If it doesn't cause more havoc I'll
promote it to make/property.xml and apply it to all modules.
On 9 August 2006 at 15:53, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just saw your note after committing a further tweak.
I thought the same thing, but did it in a slightly different way. We
could play like this for hours :-)
I tried something like the way you did it first... but... that ends
BTW what are the real advantages of having one binary?
I'd say that having separate binaries is more flexible solution in general:
1. Don't care about performance degradation due to runtime checks.
2. Easy to port to new platforms by expanding #define's.
3. Possibility to link statically against
I think Oleg has summarized and expressed better many of the things I was
trying to say. A single binary on a least common denominator platform is a
legacy binary. It runs unoptimized on other platforms. Though the term Win
precedes these Microsoft operatig systems, that's a brand. W2K, WinXP
2006/8/9, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
BTW what are the real advantages of having one binary?
I'd say that having separate binaries is more flexible solution in general:
1. Don't care about performance degradation due to runtime checks.
2. Easy to port to new platforms by expanding
On 8/9/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it is the question you also pose elsewhere -- can we have a binary
that either (a) uses the lowest common denominator of the different
windows platforms API without incurring an undue penalty performance, or
(b) performs runtime checks and
The right way
to do this would be to have different code bases and different distributions
for W2K and WinXP.
Having different codebases is far worse, this implies separate test
suites, increased complexity of the build system and other bad things.
It would be better to avoid this if possible.
It has a building
cost, but the major overhead is not building, but testing. If we were to
support a platform, we would need to test on it anyway.
Good point! So, common denominator approach has at least that
advantage that it needs less testing - on one platform.
On 8/9/06, Rana Dasgupta
On 8/9/06, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having different codebases is far worse, this implies separate test
suites, increased complexity of the build system and other bad things.
It would be better to avoid this if possible.
I think that is a price you have decided to pay if you
Oleg Khaschansky wrote:
BTW what are the real advantages of having one binary?
I'd say that having separate binaries is more flexible solution in general:
1. Don't care about performance degradation due to runtime checks.
2. Easy to port to new platforms by expanding #define's.
3.
Oleg Khaschansky wrote:
The right way
to do this would be to have different code bases and different
distributions
for W2K and WinXP.
Having different codebases is far worse, this implies separate test
suites, increased complexity of the build system and other bad things.
It would be
On Wednesday 09 August 2006 17:49, Rana Dasgupta wrote:
I think Oleg has summarized and expressed better many of the things I was
trying to say. A single binary on a least common denominator platform is a
legacy binary. It runs unoptimized on other platforms. Though the term Win
precedes these
Maybe [1] will give some additional info.
It is out of the context of DRLVM discussion, but awt uses GDI+
extensively. According to [1] GDI+ is not available on w2k.
[1]
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/sdkintro/sdkintro/windows_xp.asp
On 8/9/06, Geir Magnusson
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
One binary for PIII and IPF? Really bad idea!
I know, I was just winding him up ;-)
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
-
Terms of use :
On 8/9/06, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe [1] will give some additional info.
It is out of the context of DRLVM discussion, but awt uses GDI+
extensively. According to [1] GDI+ is not available on w2k.
[1]
Tim,
Thanks for fixing my quoting. I seem to always mess this up :-)
Please see below for a couple of points...
On 8/9/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But there are degrees to which this is done too right? Somewhere along
the spectrum from a start-up check that chooses between
On Wednesday 09 August 2006 20:52 Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
So - lets start with this -
what are the aspects of the DRLVM codebase that make it not work on
Win2k, what are the alternatives, and what are the costs to those
alternatives?
Ok going technical from here. The vectored exception
Hi, I am testing the latest Harmony JRE (Aug-4-06) with a servlet
engine on Windows XP SP2. The first obstacle I hit was related to the
use of sun/misc/BASE64Encoder
I got a java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError exception.
Is there a workaround? was this class located under a different package?
Martin Cordova wrote:
Hi, I am testing the latest Harmony JRE (Aug-4-06) with a servlet
engine on Windows XP SP2. The first obstacle I hit was related to the
use of sun/misc/BASE64Encoder
I got a java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError exception.
Is there a workaround? was this class located
btw... which servlet engine?
Did you get anything done before you ran into the missing class? We're
interested in hearing how it went...
geir
Martin Cordova wrote:
Hi, I am testing the latest Harmony JRE (Aug-4-06) with a servlet
engine on Windows XP SP2. The first obstacle I hit was related
commons-codec and Ant both have base64 encoders AFAIK.
-Matt
--- Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Cordova wrote:
Hi, I am testing the latest Harmony JRE (Aug-4-06)
with a servlet
engine on Windows XP SP2. The first obstacle I hit
was related to the
use of
I was testing a servlet engine called Winstone v0.8.2 - very
lightweight and minimalistic (winstone.sourceforge.net). It started
very fast, and everything seemed to work nice until I reached the
point of encoding a password...
I also make heavy use of Resin servlet engine, I will test it with
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 17:58 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Yes- the idea is to provide that suncompat.jar for that reason with
those clases in the sun.* namespace that user apps depend on.
This way lies madness. I urge you to take a strong stand against bad
applications.
Experience tells us
59 matches
Mail list logo
