This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: [RFC] Fix PosixProcess by porting VMProcess from Classpath...
- From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- To: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>
- Cc: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, Casey Marshall <rsdio at metastatic dot org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 10:10:24 +0100
- Subject: Re: [RFC] Fix PosixProcess by porting VMProcess from Classpath...
- References: <40F4727C.3040306@avtrex.com><40F48856.2030608@redhat.com>
Bryce McKinlay writes:
> David Daney wrote:
>
> >It is said that:
> >
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11801
> >
> >Could be fixed by using VMProcess from Classpath instead of the current
> >PosixProcess.
> >
> >There are several other problems that I have been experiencing related
> >to not reaping terminated or failed Processes that would also be fixed.
> >
> >
> >Q1: Does this seem like a good idea?.
> >
> >
>
> Yes. If the general opinion is that Classpath's VMProcess is better than
> ours, then I am in favour of switching to/merging with the classpath
> version.
Well, obviously that's true. However, we might also break things with
this change, so we need really to be convinced that it is better in
all respects. Having a single base implementation seems like a good
this, certainly.
Andrew.