On 4/12/06, Weldon Washburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 4/12/06, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > 1) Copy the luni-kernel and security-kernel stubs and add > > implementation rather than doing it in place. The stubs are just for > > compilation we shouldn't add anything VM (or VM adapter) specific to > > them. > > hmm.... not sure what you are suggesting. The stubs allow the build > to finish properly but the resultant binary won't run on any JVM > because the stubs are hollow.
Exactly! I'm saying we should leave them like that. We should copy the hollow stubs to a classpathadapter project tree and modify those rather than modifying the copies in the classlib project. Aside: Since classlib is just compiling against these stub, it doesn't really matter if we modify them to add classpath adapter specific implementation. But I think it might be confusing to others coming to implement these kernel classes for a different VM. So we should keep them hollow and not make the classpath adapter "special". Then when we want to use the adapter, we overwrite the hollow stubs in the deploy directory. As I said: > > I think we should be looking to create something, that when > > combined with JCHEVM, can be dropped in to the deploy tree in the > > same way that the current IBM VME is dropped in. HTH, Mark. -- Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
