Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 42121 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2007 10:26:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Mar 2007 10:26:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 37436 invoked by uid 500); 5 Mar 2007 10:26:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 37407 invoked by uid 500); 5 Mar 2007 10:26:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 37393 invoked by uid 99); 5 Mar 2007 10:26:30 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 02:26:30 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of sean.xx.qiu@gmail.com designates 66.249.92.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.92.169] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 02:26:21 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z36so1050468uge for ; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 02:26:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=tuZn/GupO6LThJbvo+T1rFXy9+ug1e5nVwn+H/CW96dZiy8/kKoXTPJhbyf5K8SC28r02gXJ5ndbay0uNzUB5V/p4YTIEg/L9usM2AGkLmL4TzY5baXRMsmoldOv3zzVsSLwKNghQzQ8qLvGn6dbJV8ygDlxZNY+J1QtY95t7Dk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=VyEojpbhDyBXGBZJJyV1bVASitEdLNYwJ8XcV/5zi+pI8lIvmUs278XFJfIRwBu+gnmrdBagmC37K5BIUmyEg10MbZAyzskDBtuTN7DBUDX4Q7ppo4OjgByNS0+ts1PgLCtb5puyMjzJqZu0UHj2vxXnN9mZ6vthiT02elW9Rxg= Received: by 10.66.244.10 with SMTP id r10mr10320262ugh.1173090359670; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 02:25:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.67.99.7 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Mar 2007 02:25:59 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <94d710af0703050225y7c997a74va25f125ef0f2879f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 18:25:59 +0800 From: "Sean Qiu" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [drlvm] Illegal command line options In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_30892_12664980.1173090359619" References: <45D492F9.2000801@googlemail.com> <94d710af0703050008k454ecb98sc6a8bf548a79574@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_30892_12664980.1173090359619 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 2007/3/5, Yang Paulex : > > 2007/3/5, Sean Qiu : > > > > I have been trying to run the eclipse's tests with harmony's classlib > > recently. > > > DRLVM or IBM VME? DRLVM can handle the "-verify" option, while IBM VME will fail. 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. Of course, i have report it in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3293 2007/2/16, Alexey Varlamov : > > > > > > 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 : > > > > 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 > -- Sean Qiu ------=_Part_30892_12664980.1173090359619--