From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p2PA33QX006054 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:03:03 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AucFAERnjE2BWB4RhWdsb2JhbACYU40SAQELCwsFFiXEFIVpBIx1g1Q X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.63,242,1299452400"; d="scan'208";a="94844261" Received: from mx2.imag.fr (HELO rominette.imag.fr) ([129.88.30.17]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 25 Mar 2011 11:02:58 +0100 Received: from rhin.imag.fr (rhin.imag.fr [147.171.129.2]) by rominette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2PA2uaw014688 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:02:56 +0100 Received: from [0.0.0.0] (prahova.imag.fr [147.171.129.114]) by rhin.imag.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5+lenny1) with ESMTP id p2PA2tnI007359; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:02:57 +0100 Message-ID: <4D8C684D.3040702@imag.fr> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:02:53 +0100 From: Florent Ouchet Reply-To: florent.ouchet@imag.fr Organization: Tima/CIS User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: matthieu.dubuget@gmail.com CC: Caml Mailing List References: <4D8C5071.2000403@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4D8C5071.2000403@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (rominette.imag.fr [129.88.30.17]); Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:02:56 +0100 (CET) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-MailScanner-ID: p2PA2uaw014688 X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: florent.ouchet@imag.fr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1301652176.77812@Q7aSJvWw34Z1xux7LKOmTA Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Java JVM is becoming more strict Hello Matthieu, Is your application a console application or a GUI application? In the second case, I've already seen cases where STDIN/STDOUT/STDERR pipes are completly invalid while it does work in other cases. Cheers, - Florent Matthieu Dubuget a écrit : > Hello, > > this post is just a short story for the archives of the mailing-list… > This is about a three days (successful) fight against a bug. > > Since more than three year, my colleague is using one DLL of mine. > This DLL was produced with ocaml, from some caml modules and one hand > written C file. My colleague is not perfect: he is calling this DLL > from one Java application. > > Last week, for some technical constraints, he had to upgrade the Java > virtual machine toward a >= 1.6 version. > Since this upgrade, he experienced one exception violation on the > first call to the DLL (ie when calling caml_startup). > > It appeared that some other OCaml DLL were still working fine. We made > a test, replacing the Caml modules with a minimal .ml file, returning > static values: this worked without violation exception. After that, we > printed the dependencies (ocamldep -modules) of the modules. > > The problem was that some (unused) debugging code was still there in > one of them: this module had a dependency toward Printf module. Once > this dependency was removed, we got read of the exception violation. I > wonder if this is a bug in OCaml, in the JVM, or a mis-use of the JVM? > > Salutations > > Matthieu > > > -- Florent Ouchet PhD Student CIS/VDS Team - TIMA Laboratory