Skip to main content

build cldc on javacall layer

4 replies [Last post]
Joined: 2006-05-05
Points: 0

In mr3 in pcsl\makefiles\platform we can find the file javacall_arm_evc. But in cldc\build directory, we can not find javacall_arm_evc instead there exists javacall_i386_vc and javacall_linux_arm. If I wanna build cldc on the layer javacall using arm and evc, which one should I choose from the two? Or should I start a new configuration for myself? I'm confused. Please help me.

Reply viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Joined: 2006-08-07
Points: 0
Davy Preuveneers

On Tuesday 12 August 2008 14:03:37 yevgenydiomidov wrote:
>ll_wince_arm would help [Message sent by forum member 'yevgenydiomidov'
> (yevgenydiomidov)]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

A small update:

After comparing the javacall-ext-jump branch and javacall trunk, I was able to
fix a few issues and compile a pMEA dual stack build with the WinCE
phoneMEAdvanced implementation of javacall trunk (using eVC4). I copied and
modified the configuration files from javacall/configuration/phoneMEAdvanced
to phoneMEFeature to see what would be needed to build a WinCE pMEF
implementation based on javacall.

Beyond the build problems I also have for pMEF without javacall, I did not
have any serious javacall issues with PCSL or CLDC, but for MIDP I had to
copy over many stub files from javacall/implementation/stubs to solve all
linking errors for runMidlet.exe (the win32 versions did not compile for
WinCE). As I already have a working pMEF/WinCE without javacall, I guess many
bits and pieces of the platform specific MIDP code can copied to the javacall
porting layer to fill in the missing gaps, but it is still a considerable
amount of work.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

Joined: 2006-05-05
Points: 0

Thanks. Then in your opinion, which porting process is easier? Within or without javacall layer? Is it worth to try to build for wince through javacall layer?

Joined: 2007-01-03
Points: 0

I have already done the port to WinCE and Windows Mobile without javacall. You will find the
binaries and patches on my website:

You may find some other diffs over here, but some of them are very experimental:

The most difficult part is setting up your build environment, but that is a problem that
you have already encountered I see.

Doing a complete port of javacall for WinCE is probably the best way forward, because several
JSR implementations rely on javacall. Also, once the wince javacall port is complete,
it will also simplify porting the other layers (PCSL, CLDC, MIDP, JSRs). So far, I have been
able to compile pMEF with a javacall wince stack, but several methods still need to
be implemented before it can be used.