harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Shimansky <gshiman...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-2669) [classlib][charsets] Working with charset ISO-2022-CN crashes DRLVM
Date Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:45:42 GMT
Tim Ellison wrote:
> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>> On Wednesday 18 April 2007 00:26 Tim Ellison wrote:
>>> Gregory Shimansky wrote:
>>>> Below is my evaluation of the bug HARMONY-2669. I think it is in ICU4JNI
>>>> native code. The possible solution for it is to recompile ICUInterface34
>>>> libraries from patched sources and file a bug on ICU meanwhile.
>>>> I would like to know, what sources were used to compile ICU4JNI for
>>>> windows and other operation systems? I found today that ICU4JNI 3.4
>>>> contains quite a lot of memory leaks, and there is a patch to fix them in
>>>> v3.4 [1]. Was it used to compile our binaries (from what I learned while
>>>> analyzing this bug on windows 32 it *was* used)? I know that I didn't use
>>>> it when I compiled ICU for IPF because I learned about its existence only
>>>> today. Are there any other patches for ICU code that we need to use for
>>>> version 3.4?
>>>> [1]
>>>> ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/software/globalization/icu/icu4j/icu4jni/3.4/i
>>>> cu4jni_3_4_patch-01.zip
>>> Sorry that you had to find it the hard way Gregory.  The ICU4JNI code
>>> does have the patch applied, as described in the readme in the depends'
>>> ICU4JNI directory[1].
>> I didn't find it a hard way, I just didn't look for any patches when I created 
>> IPF binaries some time ago. I the memory leaks patch when I went to ICU site 
>> to download its sources to see what's going on when it calls VM JNI code. 
>> What I found out is that it calls VM JNI code with a wrong elems pointer and 
>> to fix the bug we need to patch ICU. The bug is present it 3.6 as well.
>> So my question was actually, do we need any patches other than memory leaks 
>> patch to build ICU binaries that we have in SVN currently?
> No, the code is just 3.4 with patch 1.
> I'd have no objection to moving to 3.6, and asking the ICU team for an
> official patch for the elems bug.  We could use a temporary patch while
> we wait.

I think there was a suggestion to move to version 3.6 but I don't know 
what the decision was when the discussion has finished. Could someone 
remind me?


View raw message