Costin,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 1. I think combining the wrappers ( any of them ) with the
> platform-specific native code used inside tomcat is _bad_.
> One of the good things about tomcat is that it can be started/mebedded
> in many different ways. Creating a small jni library is quite trivial -
> MacOS may be different, but I'm sure they provide a way and we can
> support it ( if we want in-process and unix sockets there we'll
> have to do it anyway - that's jni based ). Keep them separated -
> it's more flexible.
I have already wrote a quick test on Mac OS X. It works just like all other
platforms. The only difference is that you need to link your shared library with
"-bundle" and name it libxxxx.jnilib instead of libxxxx.so. After that,
System.loadLibrary("xxxx") will load the library. You don't even need to link to
any of the JVM's libraries to do this.
>
> 2. The 'normal' way to do this, used by all unix daemons, by
> all other java servers ( including JavaWebServer and any other
> containers except tomcat ) is to use a (jni) call to chuid.
> It works, it's tested and clean.
> I'm sure this can be obfuscated or done using whatever callbacks
> mechanism ( opening all the resource in the wrapper, etc) , but doing it
> in the natural way is better IMHO.
This is why I was pursuing this approach for the last 2 days. I have seen this
type of code way back when I was porting the Java Web Server's JNI code to
HP-UX, AIX, and DEC Unix a few years back. Also, I believe that Apache follows
this same logic path (although it doesn't need JNI to get to the C function, of
course).
Patrick
--
_____________________________________________________________________
Patrick Luby Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems Phone: 408-276-7471
901 San Antonio Road, USCA14-303
Palo Alto, CA 94303-4900
_____________________________________________________________________
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
