harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yang Paulex" <paulex.y...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] Illegal command line options
Date Mon, 05 Mar 2007 09:05:03 GMT
2007/3/5, Sean Qiu <sean.xx.qiu@gmail.com>:
>
> I have been trying to run the eclipse's tests with harmony's classlib
> recently.


DRLVM or IBM VME?

There are some tests will pass the string "-verify" to create a new VM.
> For the reason mentioned by Oliver, all these tests failed because our
> launcher pass it directly to vm.
> It seems that the option "-verify" is widespread.
>
> So, i suggest to handle this specificly for -verify in our launcher.


If this incompatibility break applications like Eclipse, I think we have no
choice but to be compatible, and I agree that this case should be fixed in
launcher, because if one Harmony compatible VM complies with RI and spec on
this -verify option, Harmony launcher should not break it.

Would you please raise a jira on this? I'd like to look at it.

2007/2/16, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com>:
> >
> > You are right, I'm reading the same in the spec ... and this appears
> > to be a problem.
> > There is a number of standard options actualy:
> > -client/-server, -agentlib/-agentpath, -ea/-da/-esa/-dsa/, -help,
> > -version/-showversion etc
> > Should the launcher recognize&convert all of them? Looks somewhat
> > cumbersome...
> > Maybe just prefix any unrecognized with __(double underscore), like
> > -verify to __-verify.
> > Just easier for VM to trim such prefix and parse as standard arg :)
> >
> > --
> > Alexey
> >
> > 2007/2/15, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com>:
> > > It has come to my attention recently that DRLVM accepts the -verify
> > > option when it is passed in through the invocation API. This actually
> > > breaks the JNI spec rules outlined at:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/jni/spec/invocation.html#wp16334
> > >
> > > These rules are actually quite tight - if I read it correctly, it
> > > appears that they do *not* allow the VM to interpret "-version" as an
> > > option, and if you write a simple launcher that tries to pass -version
> > > to the RI via CreateJavaVM you get an error:
> > >
> > >  Unrecognized option: -version
> > >  Cannot create JavaVM
> > >
> > > The spec seems fairly clear that we should not respect these options
> if
> > > they are passed through, but we can accept X prefixed versions of
> them.
> > > This would require the launcher to convert these options from e.g.
> > > -verify to -Xverify before passing them into the VM.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Oliver
> > >
> > > --
> > > Oliver Deakin
> > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> number
> > 741598.
> > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
> > 3AU
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean Qiu
>



-- 
Paulex Yang
China Software Development laboratory
IBM

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