ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <ste...@apache.org>
Subject OpenVMS execution
Date Fri, 12 May 2006 09:44:53 GMT
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2006, Steve Loughran <stevel@apache.org> wrote:
>> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> 
>>> you also changed ForkingJavaRmic to use isFailure() instead of the
>>> exitCode == 0 check that was in it before.  If rmic returns 0 on
>>> success on OpenVMS, you've just broken the task.
>> ooh, good point. Roll back?
> 
> That's why I suggested you ask the people from your OpenVMS group -
> actually it would be good if at least one of them was subscribed here.
> Maybe you've fixed the task and not broken it.

I've been thinking about this whole thing. It comes down to this, (I 
believe)

-classic VMS apps have a complex return code logic

-unix has a fairly simple 0 for success, !=0 for failure

-apps that ship with the JDK have the unix model

-java apps have the unix model

Prior to ant1.6, the unix model was all that ant had. so it worked on 
all non -VMS platforms, and it worked for java apps

Then we put that patch from the OpenVMS people that said "here is the 
logic to handle VMS return codes", with some other stuff for execing 
java apps. I don't know where jdk exes fit in here - I think they need 
to be given unix rights.

If there are some executables with unix result code logic, and other 
bits with VMS rules, then its essentially impossible to "automatically" 
make the right decision.

We could switch to unix-policy-everywhere, with a per-<exec> flip to VMS 
if you want run VMS-specific apps. My concern there is cvs and SVN: what 
kind of exe are they?

-steve




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org


Mime
View raw message