[Mono-devel-list] Mono on AIX [Virus checked]

[Paolo Molaro]

On 11/30/04 Winfried.Harbecke at Extern.Sparkassen-Informatik.de wrote:
> ============================================================
> /bin/sh ../../mkinstalldirs /opt/freeware/lib/mono/1.0
>  ../.././install-sh -c -m 644 mscorlib.dll
> /opt/freeware/lib/mono/1.0/mscorlib.dll
> MONO_PATH=. ../../mono/interpreter/mint --config ../../data/config
> ./../gacutil.exe /i ./Accessibility.dll /f /package 1.0 /gacdir
> /opt/freeware/lib /root /opt/freeware/lib
> 
> ** (./../gacutil.exe:20402): WARNING **: Using non-atomic functions!

Could you print the default preprocessor defines that your compiler
defines? We current use __ppc__ and __powerpc__ and it looks it
doesn't define either.

> ** ERROR **: file interp.c: line 4153 (add_signal_handler): assertion
> failed: (sigaction (signo, &sa, NULL) != -1)

You could use perror() to print an error message instead of the
abort there, so we could see what is the error.

> at least I could help preparing the ground. I did start looking at Power PC
> instruction set and AIX linkage conventions, so in case someone else wants

The calling convention should be very close to the darwin one: there
is a difference, though: function descriptors are used.

> The THREAD_* defines in mono/io-layer/misc.c are not being used anywhere
> (except THREAD_ALL_ACCESS), it might make sense to reduce the potential
> of name conflict by another prefix.
> 
> The glib library reference in the arch/ppc Makefile is required because the
> asm macros
> are pulling in the glib trace function "g_logv".

Most of the changes are fine, will commit, except the THREAD_ stuff and
will make including <time.h> unconditional.

> Paolo, there is a collection of slides that you apparently presented to an
> IBM
> audience  (at least it it accessible from an IBM page) - what was the
> reaction?
> It looks like IBM is running some .NET integration projects, but I have a
> feeling
> that they have not made up their mind if they should put their resources
> into
> Open Source activities that (from their pserspective) support Microsoft.

The impression I got while talking to the IBM guys is that there is
some interest in mono, that they don't think either one of Java or .Net
will take over the world, so they are looking at ways to make them
interoperate better. They have costumers pushing for more integration,
so, even if they have millions of lines of code invested in java, I think
they'll eventually support in some way the CLI standard and of course
a free software implementation of the standard like mono could be a
good starting point. Diversity is good, it drives innovation. Many
Java people are happier now, because the existence of mono and .net will
allow java and the jvm to evolve (even if sometimes on the wrong paths,
like the generics implementation in java: I'm sure the JVM jit hackers 
will have years of research and work ahead to try and make them fast:-).

lupus

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
lupus at debian.org                                     debian/rules
lupus at ximian.com                             Monkeys do it better