Should we get rid of libnpt.so ?

[Staffan Larsen]

It makes sense to have this code separated out. But I’m not sure it makes sense to compile it into a separate library. We could just as well compile in the necessary source files where needed. And if there are unused functions, I think they could be removed to decrease the maintenance burden.

/Staffan

On 4 apr 2014, at 18:28, Dmitry Samersoff <dmitry.samersoff at oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi Everybody,
> 
>  We have an libnpt.so[1] in JDK. This library contains bunch of UTF
> related functions. On a brief investigation it looks like most of these
> functions are not used. Six functions below called one time each from
> share/back/* and hprof_init.c [2]
> 
>  Should I file a CR to have it cleaned up - remove npt library as a
> separate entity and move few utf functions that really used to place
> where it actually called.
> 
> 
> [1] Library sources location
> 
> src/share/npt
> src/solaris/npt
> src/windows/npt
> 
> [2] Library usage
> 
> src/share/back/transport.c:
> 
> utf8FromPlatform
> utf8ToPlatform
> 
> src/share/back/inStream.c:
> 
> utf8sToUtf8m
> utf8sToUtf8mLength
> 
> src/share/back/outStream.c:
> 
> utf8mToUtf8s
> utf8mToUtf8sLength
> 
> 
> src/share/demo/jvmti/hprof/hprof_init.c
> 
> utf8ToPlatform
> 
> 
> -Dmitry
> 
> -- 
> Dmitry Samersoff
> Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia
> * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources.