Robert Lougher gmail.com> writes:
>
> Hi Dalibor,
>
> Dalibor Topic kaffe.org> writes:
>
> > Kaffe uses its own sysdepCallMethod code but can also use libffi as an
> > additional option. See config/$arch/sysdepCallMethod.h for details. See
> > config/sysdepCallMethod-ffi.h for the wrapper for
Michael Koch gmx.de> writes:
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 02:39:19PM +, Robert Lougher wrote:
> > Michael Koch gmx.de> writes:
> >
> >
> > > Please don't use jamvm in general. It's only available on i386, powerpc
> > > and arm. It's not ported yet to other archs and Porting to 64-bit archs
Hi Dalibor,
Dalibor Topic kaffe.org> writes:
> Kaffe uses its own sysdepCallMethod code but can also use libffi as an
> additional option. See config/$arch/sysdepCallMethod.h for details. See
> config/sysdepCallMethod-ffi.h for the wrapper for ffi. Feel free to merge it
> into JamVM, if you thin
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 05:40:22PM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote:
>
> From: Robert Lougher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Wolfgang Baer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:08:49 +0000
> Subject: Re: libbsf-java
>
> Hi again,
>
> > The statement o
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 05:47:27PM +, Robert Lougher wrote:
> Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
> >
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > That is just because of the debian policy which states that a package
> > must be buildable from source on all debian arches. As jamvm is
> > currently not available on all a
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 02:39:19PM +, Robert Lougher wrote:
> Michael Koch gmx.de> writes:
>
>
> > Please don't use jamvm in general. It's only available on i386, powerpc
> > and arm. It's not ported yet to other archs and Porting to 64-bit archs
> > is hard due to the 32-bit ugliness in the
Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
> The difficulty (once 64-bit support is done) with porting JamVM to
> these architectures is the calling convention. Other VMs (e.g.
> SableVM) rely on libffi to do this portably. I prefer to instead use
> hand-coded routines for each architecture/platform (using
Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
>
> Dalibor Topic wrote:
> > Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
> >
> >
> >>But, kaffe is atm horrible broken for most package builds due to
> >>bug (#295014). Every second package fails due to this bug to build.
&
Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> That is just because of the debian policy which states that a package
> must be buildable from source on all debian arches. As jamvm is
> currently not available on all arches the consequence is that if
> I use jamvm for BUILDING my package on i386
Robert Lougher gmail.com> writes:
>
> Michael Koch gmx.de> writes:
>
> > Please don't use jamvm in general. It's only available on i386,
powerpc
> > and arm. It's not ported yet to other archs and Porting to 64-bit
archs
> > is hard due to the 32-bit ugliness in the upstream code.
> >
> > B
Dalibor Topic wrote:
Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
But, kaffe is atm horrible broken for most package builds due to
bug (#295014). Every second package fails due to this bug to build.
libbsf-java is one of them thats why I had to switch. I already
contacted upstream but didn't get any
Wolfgang Baer gmx.de> writes:
> But, kaffe is atm horrible broken for most package builds due to
> bug (#295014). Every second package fails due to this bug to build.
> libbsf-java is one of them thats why I had to switch. I already
> contacted upstream but didn't get any
--- Begin Message ---
Hi again,
> The statement of better choice is here maybe a bit out of context. gij,
> kaffe or sablevm are in the case of using the vm to BUILD a package for
> DEBIAN the (normally) only choice. But that has nothing to do with
> the quality or fitness for a given task of jam
Hi Robert,
Robert Lougher wrote:
Michael Koch gmx.de> writes:
Please don't use jamvm in general. It's only available on i386, powerpc
and arm. It's not ported yet to other archs and Porting to 64-bit archs
is hard due to the 32-bit ugliness in the upstream code.
Better choices are gij, kaffe or s
Michael Koch gmx.de> writes:
> Please don't use jamvm in general. It's only available on i386, powerpc
> and arm. It's not ported yet to other archs and Porting to 64-bit archs
> is hard due to the 32-bit ugliness in the upstream code.
>
> Better choices are gij, kaffe or sablevm.
>
And with
5014). Every second package fails due to this bug to build.
| libbsf-java is one of them thats why I had to switch. I already
| contacted upstream but didn't get any response so far.
[...]
Kaffe is fixed in upstream CVS thanks to patches from Guilhelm Lavaux.
Arnaud is working on packaging it.
to
bug (#295014). Every second package fails due to this bug to build.
libbsf-java is one of them thats why I had to switch. I already
contacted upstream but didn't get any response so far.
This is AFAIK solved upstream. Arnaud only needs to finish the deb.
No it is not. I just build a local cv
32-bit ugliness in the upstream code.
Better choices are gij, kaffe or sablevm.
You are right !
But, kaffe is atm horrible broken for most package builds due to
bug (#295014). Every second package fails due to this bug to build.
libbsf-java is one of them thats why I had to switch. I already
contact
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 08:36:17AM +0100, Wolfgang Baer wrote:
> Michael Koch wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >Who works on libbsf-java. The MovingToMain page [1] says it has an issue
> >with using the class sun.tools.javac.Main. Can we use the fix from
> >upstream CVS and add
Michael Koch wrote:
Hi all,
Who works on libbsf-java. The MovingToMain page [1] says it has an issue
with using the class sun.tools.javac.Main. Can we use the fix from
upstream CVS and add it as patch to this package?
When this issue is solved libxalan2-java nad libbsf-java can ve uploaded
to main
Hi all,
Who works on libbsf-java. The MovingToMain page [1] says it has an issue
with using the class sun.tools.javac.Main. Can we use the fix from
upstream CVS and add it as patch to this package?
When this issue is solved libxalan2-java nad libbsf-java can ve uploaded
to main. bcel is already
21 matches
Mail list logo
