This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: Experimental UNICODE-only MinGW Build
- From: João Garcia <jgarcia at uk2 dot net>
- To: gnustuff at thisiscool dot com
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org, Bryce McKinlay <bryce at mckinlay dot net dot nz>, tromey at redhat dot com, João Garcia <jgarcia at uk2 dot net>, Ranjit Mathew <rmathew at hotmail dot com>, luciano at virgilio dot it
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:39:23 +0000
- Subject: Re: Experimental UNICODE-only MinGW Build
- References: <2YPK8A807IDKIZXXW847152CAIVTJG.3fbb8b7e@p733>
Thank you! Nice work. This can be useful for many people already, and it
is a step forward.
Could you post the relevant code (using the mailing list or on your web
site)? Thank you. :-)
(just natFileWin32.java and natFileDescriptorWin32.java and eventual
I do not know if the experimental gcj bundle includes those sources, but
if you would post the relevant sources we (or at least i...) wouldn't
have to pull the bundle to evaluate it...
But AFAIK this is only the static link portion for the dll (and it is
not small). Am i right?
At present, this will produce executables for WinNT / Win2K / WinXP
only. I'm going to look into integrating this with UNICOWS for
You still have to have the MS dll for this to work on Win9X.
And you cannot allow re-distribution of the DLL and can only distribute
it bundled with your code that should be exclusively for Windows platform...
In other words: MS forces you to limit your own distribution license and
bundled code (see Open Office project for details)...
And it is not easy to set a link for the UNICOWS distribution in the MS
web site (it changes all the time)...
Besides that, you do not need the major part of the UNICOWS bundle just
to make character conversions. It would be better to make our own
"mini-unicows" for this purpose, based on
WideCharToMultiByte()/MultiByteToWideChar() and A-function calls!
Anyway... this would make things for Win32 to far apart from POSIX in
the IO library... I would not recommend this way at all...
But you could do this just for sport! :-)
It would be nice... :-)
I did this in the spirit of curious experimentation only; it should not
be construed as any official stance or direction.