public inbox for java@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>
To: Sal <svferro@gmail.com>
Cc: java@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCJ with OpenJDK Java API instead of GNU Classpath
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 09:17:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A02A70C.3030101@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A020407.2090306@gmail.com>

Sal wrote:
> Forgive me if this is a silly question - but I wanted to ping the list
> before spending any time/effort here.
> 
> Grabbing GCJ's standard source releases, one can see that GNU classpath
> is integrated.   I've actually used classpath a lot and its a very
> stable API for me.
> 
> However - given recent events, particularly the 'freeing' of Java
> sources by Sun - is it a good idea to attempt to use Sun's 'official'
> Java API sources instead?  This would give the option of maximum Java
> API compatibility but also giving the ability to precompile native code
> using GCJ (which you cant do with OpenJDK afaik)
> 
> So my questions:
> 
> - Has anyone already attempted building the OpenJDK java sources with
> GCJ/and/or tried to swap out classpath for those classes?
> - if not are people interested in going down this path? I am willing to
> put some efforts here.
> - Are there licensing issues with linking OpenJDK to other code via GCJ?
> From what I remember 'linking' is a touchy area with some FOSS licenses.

It's all GPL + exception, so there are no licence difficulties.

This would be an excellent thing to do, but it would be difficult.  In
particular, class loading and class initialization are done in very
different ways, and this would all need to be rewritten.

I'd love someone to do this, but I don't want them to be under any illusion
about how difficult it might be.

Andrew.

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-07  9:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-06 20:43 Sal
2009-05-07  9:17 ` Andrew Haley [this message]
2009-05-07 11:45   ` Bryce McKinlay
2009-05-07 13:25     ` Andrew John Hughes
2009-05-07 13:43       ` Andrew Haley
2009-05-07 13:50         ` Bryce McKinlay
2009-05-07 20:24   ` Sal
2009-05-08  8:04     ` Robert Schuster
2009-05-08 10:08     ` Andrew Haley
2009-05-07 16:28 ` Mark Wielaard
2009-05-08 13:47   ` Robert Schuster
2009-05-07 14:31 Chris Gray
2009-05-07 15:29 ` Andrew John Hughes
2009-05-07 16:25   ` Mark Wielaard
2009-05-07 16:32     ` Andrew Haley
2009-05-07 17:10       ` Mark Wielaard
2009-05-07 17:20         ` Andrew Haley
2009-05-07 17:24           ` David Boreham
2009-05-07 17:34             ` Andrew Haley
2009-05-07 17:44           ` Mark Wielaard
2009-05-08  0:22             ` Andrew John Hughes
2009-05-08 10:13               ` Andrew Haley
2009-05-08 11:00                 ` Mark Wielaard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4A02A70C.3030101@redhat.com \
    --to=aph@redhat.com \
    --cc=java@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=svferro@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).