harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Konstantin Lupach" <konstantin.lup...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: latest stable packages JRE packages - jre-r603534 (M4)
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:25:59 GMT
Mark, can you please comment what are the licensing issues preventing us
from libstdc++ redistribution you are talking about?
I do know it is allowed to redistribute this library even with commercial
products.
E.g. this is what Intel(R) VTune(TM) Performance Analyzer for Linux does.

I also know that there are some technical issues/tricks with this
dependency. Let discuss them in a separate thread.

Kind regards,
Konstantin Lupach
Intel Corporation
Nizhny Novgorod, Russia


On 1/16/08, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 16 January 2008 at 9:24, "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
> > 2008/1/15, Konstantin Lupach <konstantin.lupach@gmail.com>:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I gave a try these packages on Linux IA32 host
> > > with RHEL3 update 6 and noticed that both
> > > apache-harmony-jre-r603534-linux-x86-32-libstdc++v6- snapshot.tar.gz
> > > and apache-harmony-jre-r603534-linux-x86-32-snapshot.tar.gzrequire
> > > libstdc++.so.6. Was the 2-nd package built in a wrong compiler
> > > environment?
> > >
> > > The 2-nd question is about libstdc++ dependency. Why not to
> > > incapsulate this VM libraries dependecy? It can be either linked
> > > statically or if you want to reduce libraries size it is possible
> > > to put it to the build directory and provide a single IA32 package
> > > instead of 2 stdc++ dependent as it is done now.
> > Yes, we have this, I would say, ugly dependency. Which comes from ICU
> > as far as I remember.
>
> Not really.  The dependency on libstdc++ comes from any library that
> includes C++ code so most of the awt and imageio libraries, and a number
> of libraries in the VM.  The libstdc++5 specific dependencies from the
> default x86 icu is trivially avoided using the ant option.
>
> > I really believe that we should resolve this issue somehow. Do be
> > honest I'm tired of this type of failures with downloaded packages
> > myself.
>
> It doesn't seem to be something that has come up often on the -dev
> list.  How much of a problem is this?
>
> > Any ideas or patches to fix this issue?
> > I'll investigate the problem deeper....
>
> I'm not sure we can "fix" this issue - by distributing libstdc++
> ourselves - because of licensing issues.
>
> Regards,
> Mark.
>
>


-- 
Kind regards,
Konstantin Lupach

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message