harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Xiao-Feng Li <xiaofeng...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [arch] Modular JVM component diagram
Date Mon, 29 Aug 2005 01:06:35 GMT
Posix is popular and widely used across many different platforms. Intel had 
implemented ORP basically on top of Posix, and it was easy to use Posix to 
wrap Windows APIs. 

Now there are more portable API libraries to choose from, such as APR, and 
IBM Portability Library. For ease of portability across a broad range of 
platforms, I suggest that we use APR as the portability api. Do folks on the 
mailing list think that this is a good idea?

Thanks,
xiaofeng

On 8/20/05, Tom <ecl@gatewide.com> wrote:
> 
> Joerg,
> 
> thanks for your link, seems like APR is the way to go.
> 
> Just one more thing: Instead of just having an abstraction layer, would
> it be possible to give our solution a little finer granularity right
> from the start ?
> E.g. define a part of this layer so that only this part is required on a
> target to get the JVM to run. This will help to use Harmony with
> different bootpaths later on. For example, the VM will not require
> libraries for X-Path and database operations, or will it? (They seem to
> be required to run libapr0 in your link)
> 
> Thanks
> Tom
> 
> Joerg Wendland wrote:
> > *unlurk*
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 12:15:40AM -0700, Tom wrote:
> >
> >>I like the APR idea, but still would like to evaluate how feasible it
> >>will be to port whatever we chose as the OAL to various embedded
> >>platforms, in particular ARM, PowerPC and MIPS.
> >
> >
> > Es you can for example see at [0] APR compiles, runs and is supported on
> > these architectures plus nine others.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jörg
> >
> > [0] http://packages.debian.org/unstable/net/libapr0
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message