RE: [Wrapper-user] Request from users about new 32 vs 64-bit distributions

[Andreas W. <and...@em...>]

Hi Nikki,

yes, you could. But normally, the other compilers are commercial and cost quite a lot of money. And you have to figure out by yourself, how to do this. If I got it right, in the Makefile.hpux64, there is already used the HP's compiler cc, so you may use this as a template.

A quicker solution would be to force gcc to link the own static libraries instead of the shared ones.
This could be accomplished by adding the option "-static-libgcc" to the linker line.

I cannot imagine an impact on the GPL by linking the library statically (you also have a reference when using the shared lib). But on the other hand, I also cannot imagine why rhere is a need to link this library... But I am not an GPL expert!

Cheers,
Andreas

wra...@li... schrieb am 22.12.05 20:33:35:
> 
> Can you use another compiler besides gcc on the hp platform to eliminate
> the dynamic link dependency on the gcc library
> /sww/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11/3.2/../../../libgcc_s.sl?
> 
> Nicki
>  
> nta...@Fi...
> (714) 327-3690
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wra...@li...
> [mailto:wra...@li...] On Behalf Of Leif
> Mortenson
> Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 5:42 AM
> To: Wrapper User List
> Subject: [Wrapper-user] Request from users about new 32 vs 64-bit
> distributions
> 
> Hi all,
> I am trying to get a plan for the 3.2.0 release finalized, and am stuck
> on
> how exactly to handle the 64 bit platforms. Ant does not seem to have
> any reliable way to differentiate between 32 and 64 bit versions of
> java.
> I am looking for a way to do so to make the builds work cleanly.
> 
> Could you please tell me your os, CPU, run the fully detailed uname
> command "uname -a", letting me know if the option is different.
> Also modify any build.xml and give me the output of the following from
> ant:
> <echo message="os.name='${os.name}' os.arch='${os.arch}'"/>
> 
> If there are not any ways to decide within ant, then I may modify
> the build.sh and build.bat scripts to make the decision by parsing the
> uname results and then pass a -D64bit parameter to the JVM when
> launching Ant. The problem there is that I really want to build for the
> JVM rather than the OS. It is possible to run 32 bit JVMs on a 64 bit
> system...
> 
> I have decided to include the architecture in the distribution name
> to handle the fact there there will now be 32 and 64 bit versions of
> most platforms.
> 32 bit examples are:
> wrapper_win32_x86_3.2.0
> wrapper_linux_x86_3.2.0
> 
> What do you think the distribution names should be for the 32 and
> 64 bit versions of Solaris, HPUX, Linux, etc... x86 is shown for the 32
> bit architecture. But what makes sense for the 64 bit systems. Are
> versions build for the 64 AMD going to be the same as the Intel chips?
> Sorry for my ignorance in this area, but I don't have any to play with.
> 
> Any suggestions in this area are welcome.
> 
> Cheers,
> Leif
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log
> files
> for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Wrapper-user mailing list
> Wra...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wrapper-user
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
> for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Wrapper-user mailing list
> Wra...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wrapper-user