harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] JPackage - new opportunity for Harmony?
Date Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:38:46 GMT
On 11/15/07, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2007/11/15, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com>:
> > > Not so good thing is that we need significant changes to Harmony's
> > > build system to be fully compatible with building Harmony from source
> > > RPM. Which is probably not a requirement for JPackage but a good form
> > > for Linux community.
> >
> > I assume you mean the requirements not to include external
> > libraries/jars?  I've been thinking about this problem a little and am
> > keen to move things forward.
> >
> > I added the hy.local.zlib option to remove one such issue but there
> > are many more in terms of jars/libs/fonts/etc that still need to be
> > addressed.  I don't really like the hy.local.zlib option and think that
> > really we need to (re)design the way we handle dependencies consistently
> > across classlib/jdktools/drlvm with support for local/ system and
> > remote/downloaded dependencies.  (The recent icu issue is a good example
> > of the problems that should be avoided by having an accurate, implicit,
> > consistent dependency implementation.)
> Agree, this is a real nag. The common_resources aren't work as
> intended, every module is dancing differently. BTW, the BTI solves the
> same problem once again and I guess Stepan is not quite happy in that
> - shouldn't there be a reusable solution?

I'd not say that I'm unhappy with it. Sure, there are serveral things
to be improved but it does required work as expected. I even think
that it may be reused by classlib/drlvm/jdktools at some stage :-)


View raw message