[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Visionaries] Re: dotnet platform support / gnu config.sub (long)

From: Dalibor Topic
Subject: [Visionaries] Re: dotnet platform support / gnu config.sub (long)
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 20:05:51 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312

Guido Draheim wrote:

For the java machine, the term `jvm` is used universally. I do not
remember there were any dependency on pointer lengths, it runs in
managed mode always.

JVM, JDK, Java, etc. are all trade marks with associated conditions of use. . Are you sure you want/need to use them?

Since ilvm64 may be run on a 32bit system, we do set the two
cpu/vm types of "ilvm" and "ilvm32" for the dotnet binaries
and libraries. Alongside we use "jvm" for jar binaries

A virtual machine capable of executing programs written in java programing language usually executes only classes stored in class files. Some virtual machines also have the capability of executing programs stored in zip archives, or jar archives. So 'jvm' is a misleading term here.

Therefore, for jvm we do usually paste 'java' as interpreter and
'jdk' as basic service series. Likewise the dotnet binaries are
given as 'ilrun' for the interpreter and 'mono' for the service
series (or something alike).

Not all java interpreters are called 'java'. there is gij, sablevm, kaffe, wonka, and a ton of others, that don't necessarily fit into this naming scheme. While some of them provide java-named wrapper scripts, I'm not sure if all of them do.


uh, what's that sun doing there? ;) what's the difference between jvm-sun-java-jdk and jvm-sun-java-j2se supposed to be? and so on ...

I believe it would be better if you got in touch with kaffe, gcj, sablevm, classpath, debian-java etc. developers before you try to push something as big as this through as some kind of a GNU convention. I don't know much about .net yet, and being a kaffe developer, I'm more focussed on the java side of things. AFAIK, similar definitions have been tried before on debian-java, and failed.

On the other hand, if the virtual machine implementors of varios GNU projects have already been consulted, and this is the concensual proposal, I'd like to have the reference to the mailing list threads ;) If that's not happended, then let's discuss this first, as it's a good idea, but it needs to be discussed in a broader, more realted audience, than the libtool mailing list, which, sincerely, doesn't seem like a good pick to debate the finer details of naming vm systems. ;)

dalibor topic

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]