Andi Vajda (JIRA) <j...@apache.org> wrote: > Why is this a bug ?
I asked about this on the Apple java-dev mailing list a few weeks ago, and got back an answer similar to what Jim suggests. This is from Mike Swingler at Apple (swing...@apple.com): > On Mar 19, 2010, at 9:23 PM, Bill Janssen wrote: > > > [I find jni.h in the standard /System libraries, for instance] > > > > /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/1.6.0 > > > > Is this a good idea? > > No. There are no binaries that you may link against in the versioned > JVM directories, so it is not appropriate to use headers from those > directories either. > > > Or, should I always use > > /Developer/SDKs/System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/XX/Headers > > when compiling JNI code? Presumably at some point in the future, Apple > > might > > like to introduce more of the JDK/JRE distinction, perhaps for the iPhone or > > iPad? In which case jni.h might not be there at all without the developer > > SDK. > > You should link against the JavaVM.framework and use the jni.h from > the Mac OS X 10.x SDK. The only exception to this is to link directly > against the JavaVM.framework on your system if you require new > functionality that was provided in a Java software update, and not > part of an actual SDK (though this case should be rare). So, Jim's mod seems in accord with Apple's thinking. Bill
