harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Shimansky <gshiman...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [tools][launcher] Where should the launcher code reside?
Date Mon, 14 May 2007 14:14:08 GMT
Ivan Popov wrote:
> Gregory,
> 
> Today jdktools build depends on classlib and drlvm builds. Adding one
> more dependency between jdktools and classlib builds will lead to a
> cyclic dependency, which should be resolved somehow.
> 
> I think the most simple way technically is to leave launcher code in
> classlib component.

Thanks for pointing this. I didn't know that jdktools depends on 
classlib and drlvm. To break the cycle perhaps we'll have to move some 
common stuff to common_resources.

> On 5/14/07, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@apache.org> wrote:
>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
>>   > I see the next argument for moving the launcher to jdktools - this 
>> not
>> > a java library code indeed, it's just utility code that launches java.
>> > But moving it to jdktools will force everybody to work with HDK. If
>> > everybody think that this is 'right' way then I'm OK with it (I mainly
>> > work with separate classlib and DRLVM workspaces and I find it quite
>> > convenient)
>>
>> I am catching up with emails after vacations and just saw this thread. I
>> am +0.5 to java launcher in jdktools and I think that the working
>> process could be organized without having to build full HDK every time.
>>
>> Just look at how drlvm is built, it always requires to compile classlib
>> first and no one complains about it. If someone works primary on drlvm,
>> classlib may be compiled just once in a while and there is no big reason
>> to rebuild it all the time when VM is built.
>>
>> The same could be done with jdktools. Then the sequence of building
>> separate packages would be the following: jdktools -> classlib -> vm.
>> Classlib build script would copy files from the deploy directory of
>> jdktools and VM build script would copy compiled classlib to its deploy
>> directory.
>>
>> Classlib developers would need to compile jdktools just once in a while
>> (updates to the launcher are quire rare anyway) and then compile just
>> classlib which would take java executable from jdktools.
>>
>> Anyway, I agree with Tim's comment that it is not the most important
>> thing to do.
>>
>> > BWT, how many people use hdk build only?
>> >
>> > Also if we move it to jdktools we need to adjust build-and-test infra
>> > that it requires time and efforts. But I think this in turn should
>> > unify (i.e. simplify) the infra logic - all testing suites will depend
>> > on hdk build only (not on classlib + drlvm (+ hdk) as currently we
>> > have)
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Stepan.
>> >
>> >> What do you think?
>> >>
>> >> Tim
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Gregory
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Gregory


Mime
View raw message