harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Shimansky <gshiman...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [generic][launcher] help for drlvm specific properties
Date Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:15:25 GMT
Pavel Pervov wrote:
> Why adding URL to -X? Help on -X should be printed with 'java -X'. BTW,
> DRLVM does not print anything - launcher does not pass -X to DLRVM.

Just as a reference to more VM internal related stuff since -X already 
prints VM specific options. I don't insist on putting an URL into -X 
help, just think it to be logical.

> P.S. BTW, what I've proposed will solve this issue.
> 
> On 6/20/07, Gregory Shimansky <gshimansky@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Pavel Pervov wrote:
>> > Vladimir,
>> >
>> > 'java -X' usually prints out help on options, which start with -X.
>> >
>> > What you was asking about as I understood that has syntax of
>> > -XX:<vm_option>[=<value>]. Sun's VM has help on these options on
the 
>> Web
>> > page and no means to print it out to console.
>> >
>> > So, I'm -1 here for printing help on -XX options.
>>
>> I agree that it is better to provide help on DRLVM internal properties
>> on web site instead of printing it to console. We can also have a man
>> page in the future which would include that text too.
>>
>> Adding an URL to help on -X is a good idea.
>>
>> > If community still decide to print such help - there is 4-th way to do
>> so
>> > (which will require changing.launcher).
>> > 1) launcher recognizes several generic options and is able to determine
>> > application class or jar name.
>> > 2) if no -vmdir or -vmdll is specified on command line - launcher tries
>> to
>> > load that VM, otherwise defaults to <launcher
>> location>/default/harmonyvm
>> > and tryies to load this one. If it fails - it prints short help message
>> as
>> > it does right now, when launched with some unrecognizable property 
>> name.
>> > 3) if library is loaded successfully - launcher constructs arguments
>> array
>> > (as it does right now) and calls to JNI_CreateJavaVM from loaded VM
>> > library.
>> > 4) if this call returns (-?, -h, -help and -X do not return from
>> > JNI_CreateJavaVM) and if launcher finds class of jar name on the 
>> command
>> > line - it proceeds with program startup.
>> >
>> > What do you think on such generic startup sequence?
>> >
>> > WBR,
>> >    Pavel.
>> >
>> > On 6/20/07, Vladimir Beliaev <vladimir.k.beliaev@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello, All
>> >>
>> >> I want to add a *help *for drlvm specific system properties like '-
>> >> Xvm.assert_dialog=false' (as asked in
>> >> HARMONY-3409<http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3409>
>> >> ).
>> >>
>> >> *Could you send your opinion on what way this can be done?* There are
>> >> three
>> >> safe ways to do this & non of them seems to be really good (please see
>> >> technical details in
>> >> HARMONY-3409<http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3409>).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> *way 1*: support 'java -Xhelp:prop foo' command line... Like if one
>> runs
>> >> 'java -X' then this help says "run '-Xhelp:prop foo' to see sytem
>> >> properties"... In short: if one does not specify this 'foo' at the 
>> end,
>> >> then
>> >> a generic launcher consider command line as broken (no 'mainClass' is
>> >> specified) & does not invoke JNI_CreateJavaVM (which print a help)...
>> >>
>> >> *way 2*: support 'java -Xhelp:prop' command line (i.e. w/o dummy
>> >> 'foo')...
>> >> To implement this the *generic* launcher is to be changed to recognize
>> >> '-Xhelp:' as a 'help' option (like it recognizes ? -h -help -X now).
>> >> Because
>> >> of other VMs do not support such a '-Xhelp:' option we get
>> >> *generic*launcher to be a bit drlvm-specific...
>> >>
>> >> *way 3*: be like other VMs and do not print a 'help for drlvm internal
>> >> properties'. Instead, 'java -X' help output may provide a URL to
>> >> harmony.apache.org html document explaining drlvm internal system
>> >> properties...
>> >>
>> >> I would pick a *way 1* as it does not change *generic *launcher & we
>> are
>> >> free to do every thing we want with -X... I do not like *way 3* at all
>> -
>> >> it
>> >> is not a big deal to create such a document, still it is one more
>> >> document
>> >> to be supported (I believe it may become out-of-date pretty in couple
>> >> months)...
>> >>
>> >> So, what do you think?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Vladimir Beliaev
>> >> Intel Middleware Products Division
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Gregory
>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Gregory


Mime
View raw message