Today is Harmony's 1st birthday :)
geir
Happy birthday from Italy :-)
Enrico
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
Small changes are required to fix the build issue for Fedora 5.
I've prepared this patch and I'm ready to put it into JIRA.
There are two ways to make this thing:
- renew the cumulative patch created by Ivan (see JIRA issue below);
- attach these changes as separate patch and adding it to the
Andrey Chernyshev wrote:
On 5/18/06, Oliver Deakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrey Chernyshev wrote:
We would not want to couple the classlib to a particular VM
however. So
far I have been thinking
about the HDK from a classlib perspective, without considering the VM
used. I imagined that
On Tue, 16 May 2006, Fernando Cassia wrote:
| I give Sun credit for two things...
|
| 1. preventing polluting of the platform a la J++.
|
| In a June 20, 1996, memo entitled windows internet issues Microsoft's
| then-VP Paul Maritz
|
Great news! Thanks Intel, and well done to Geir and Tim for getting this
together for JavaOne!
Tim Ellison wrote:
Way to go Intel!
During the JavaOne talk we were able to demonstrate the following
applications running on last Friday's snapshot build of Harmony with
the IBM VME:
- RSSOwl 1.2
Richard, George
I'm not fan of tests that depend on network connection. Is it necessary for
this test:
+ public void test_getOutputStream_afterConnection() throws Exception {
+ URLConnection uc = new
URL(http://www.apache.org;).openConnectionhttp://www.apache.org;).openconnection/
();
+
Hi Stepan,
Yes, there is probably scope for adding some logic to this test method
where - in the event of no network connection we write a message to
stderr and move on. An alternative is to provide for connections to be
opened up against a server on the local machine. A couple of days ago I
Hi George
Wasn't that you who strictly opposed logging to stderr ~3-5 months ago? :)
As I remember, you said that no one will read that stderr.
I think the tests we have here are kind of needing 'exotic' configuration,
and they should be separated and not included to the regular pre-commit
I've intergrated the changes and updated guidlines proposal.
Please comment.
Thanks,
Mikhail
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Hi George
Wasn't that you who strictly opposed logging to stderr ~3-5 months
ago? :)
As I remember, you said that no one will read that stderr.
Hi Mikahil,
Did I say that ? :-)
Actually I still feel that way. That's why I would really rather that we
had a local
Hi George,
see below
On 5/19/06, George Harley wrote:
Hi Stepan,
Yes, there is probably scope for adding some logic to this test method
where - in the event of no network connection we write a message to
stderr and move on. An alternative is to provide for connections to be
opened up against
On 5/19/06, Stepan Mishura wrote:
Hi George,
see below
On 5/19/06, George Harley wrote:
Hi Stepan,
Yes, there is probably scope for adding some logic to this test method
where - in the event of no network connection we write a message to
stderr and move on. An alternative is to provide
Alex,
Please, find the new version (0.2) and all previous versions here:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ManageAttachments.jspa?id=12340105
Good. I like it (everyone likes when his suggestions are implemented
:-). So let me try to outline where we are in Harmony stress testing.
=== TEST
IMHO, I would prefer new patch attached. Say, named like:
DRLVM-GCC-3.4_and_4.x-cumulative_v2.patch
DRLVM-GCC-3.4_and_4.x-cumulative_20060519.patch
It could help people if something is working with old patch and
suddenly stop working with new one. Please, write small description
with patch
Hi Stepan
how far the prototype from what is desired?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/5/19, Stepan Mishura [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 5/19/06, Stepan Mishura wrote:
Hi George,
see below
On 5/19/06, George Harley wrote:
Hi Stepan,
Yes, there is probably scope for adding some logic to this test
Oliver Deakin wrote:
I personally prefer the idea of separate HDKs for VMs and classlib,
although
[... cut ...]
Eventually I imagine us having HDK, JDK and JRE bundles for
the Classlib and each VM, and the developer/user can just pick and
mix as they wish from that selection.
+1
The
Stepan Mishura wrote:
Hi George,
see below
On 5/19/06, George Harley wrote:
Hi Stepan,
Yes, there is probably scope for adding some logic to this test method
where - in the event of no network connection we write a message to
stderr and move on. An alternative is to provide for connections
On 5/19/06, Endre Stølsvik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PPS: Why does Sun really bother to pour money into Java at all? The
reason, I've come to understand, _was_ that they then could sell a bunch
of their big-iron boxes to companies when the small intel-servers couldn't
cope with a success of
Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
follow and adhere to. If this standard is defined rather more by one
company than the rest - what is the real problem?
The real problem is that if that company also markets an implementation of the
standard, there will
Hello Paulex
I have a question about this problem. Do you know how exception in finalizer
method affects the finalizer thread that it becomes suspended? I thought
that when calling finalize method the code should catch all exceptions
thrown by it and ignore them. AFAIK that's how finalizers are
Endre Stølsvik wrote:
I personally wonder what _full_ open-sourcing of java actually would
accomplish? How do you want Sun to do this? Slam a Apache-license on the
code, and say okay, folks, here it is - we're off?
Well, sure. That would be good.
I believe that it could fragment into a
Chris Gray wrote:
Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
follow and adhere to. If this standard is defined rather more by one
company than the rest - what is the real problem?
The real problem is that if that company also markets an implementation of the
On Fri, 19 May 2006, Chris Gray wrote:
|
| Open Source java wouldn't be the same if there wasn't some standard to
| follow and adhere to. If this standard is defined rather more by one
| company than the rest - what is the real problem?
|
| The real problem is that if that company also
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
public void putAll(Map attrib) {
+if( attrib == null ) {
+throw new ClassCastException();
+}
Shouldn't this have a message? I thought we agreed that we'd add useful
messages to exceptions.
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL
And if we didn't, I think we just did :)
--
Geir Magnusson Jr
SSG/MPD
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 203 665 6437
-Original Message-
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 7:03 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r407780 - in
|
| I'm not sure how to answer this. I believe you are a little confused about
| how the JCP works and what we're doing here, and people are asking for.
|
| First, we aren't advocating changes in the way Java SE specification is
| defined.
So you still want the JCP? Run by Sun? Or by who?
|
On 5/19/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, I would prefer new patch attached. Say, named like:
DRLVM-GCC-3.4_and_4.x-cumulative_v2.patch
DRLVM-GCC-3.4_and_4.x-cumulative_20060519.patch
It could help people if something is working with old patch and
suddenly stop working with new
Eventually I imagine us having HDK, JDK and JRE bundles for
the Classlib and each VM, and the developer/user can just pick and
mix as they wish from that selection.
I agree, I think this is good idea.
Another option could be still to have a single HDK for VM, but have
different versions of
Geir,
I'll grant you that Sun could handle the Java community much worse than they
do, but I still don't agree that having such a corporation in charge is a
Good Thing. Or maybe I'm just being old-fashioned, and we should get rid of
all those fuddy-duddy organisations like IETF or W3C and
On 5/19/06, Andrey Chernyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/19/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, I would prefer new patch attached. Say, named like:
DRLVM-GCC-3.4_and_4.x-cumulative_v2.patch
DRLVM-GCC-3.4_and_4.x-cumulative_20060519.patch
It could help people if something
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Hello Paulex
I have a question about this problem. Do you know how exception in
finalizer
method affects the finalizer thread that it becomes suspended? I thought
that when calling finalize method the code should catch all exceptions
thrown by it and ignore them.
Folks, this is a -dev list. There are any number of opinion forums
elsewhere where you'll get a broader interest in your point of view.
Let's talk code.
Tim
Endre Stølsvik wrote:
|
| I'm not sure how to answer this. I believe you are a little confused about
| how the JCP works and what
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Hi George
Wasn't that you who strictly opposed logging to stderr ~3-5 months ago? :)
As I remember, you said that no one will read that stderr.
I said that (George may have too).
Every test either passes or fails. We can agree that skipped tests
count as a pass or a
Stepan Mishura wrote:
snip
I'm OK only if we separate tests with Jetty from common test suite run.
Why?
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
-
Terms of use :
Oliver Deakin wrote:
Great news! Thanks Intel, and well done to Geir and Tim for getting this
together for JavaOne!
BTW, is there a video of that presentation?
--
Stefano.
-
Terms of use :
2006/5/19, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
BTW, is there a video of that presentation?
You do not need video!
You'll try it yourself soon. If everything will be ok... :)
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
Chris Gray wrote:
Geir,
I'll grant you that Sun could handle the Java community much worse than they
do, but I still don't agree that having such a corporation in charge is a
Good Thing. Or maybe I'm just being old-fashioned, and we should get rid of
all those fuddy-duddy organisations
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Now, let's go back to let the code speak.
+1 ;-)
--
Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D.http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/
SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/
SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
Everything will be ok. It's just dotted I's and crossed T's.
And no, there is no video. :)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr
SSG/MPD
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
+1 203 665 6437
-Original Message-
From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 11:42 AM
To:
Magnusson, Geir wrote:
Everything will be ok. It's just dotted I's and crossed T's.
And no, there is no video. :)
The video was to enjoy Geir's smile not to see harmony working ;-)
--
Stefano.
-
Terms of use :
George:
Ok. Would you like me to send a pruned version, or a list of files to be
removed?
Miguel
On 5/18/06, George Harley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
While preparing to commit the javax.crypto and java.math contributions
attached to HARMONY-199 I noticed that there is a lot of extra test
2006/5/20, Stefano Mazzocchi [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The video was to enjoy Geir's smile not to see harmony working ;-)
Yep! Video is really needed! :)
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
42 matches
Mail list logo
