Weird. *shrug* Oh, well. If b17 is coming by the end of the week, I guess I can wait. :-)
Ted Neward Java, .NET, XML Services Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing http://www.tedneward.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:20 PM > To: Ted Neward > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; build-dev@openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: New bug in build process > > Ted, > > the code for those methods is (in b16) in > src/share/native/sun/font/scalerMethods.c so you can see for yourself > there's nothing special about them except that the rest are JNI methods > and they aren't : they are called directly from fontmanager.dll so > if they weren't exported properly we'd know about it .. > > Anyway this will all be moot in a few days when b17 is out. > > -phil. > > Ted Neward wrote: > > I think the problem may be more subtle than this; I did a little > > investigation, and missing functions are present in T2K.DLL, but not > with > > the leading underscores. I took a look at the exports from T2K.DLL, and > > they're as follows: > > > > C:\Prg\OpenJDK\BinaryPlugs>dumpbin /exports jdk1.7.0\jre\bin\t2k.dll > > Microsoft (R) COFF/PE Dumper Version 7.10.3077 > > Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. > > > > > > Dump of file jdk1.7.0\jre\bin\t2k.dll > > > > File Type: DLL > > > > Section contains the following exports for t2k.dll > > > > 00000000 characteristics > > 468CC934 time date stamp Thu Jul 05 03:34:28 2007 > > 0.00 version > > 1 ordinal base > > 22 number of functions > > 22 number of names > > > > ordinal hint RVA name > > > > 1 0 0002306C > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 2 1 0002302E > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 3 2 00023F9F [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 4 3 00024762 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 5 4 00024027 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 6 5 0002428C [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 7 6 00024108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 8 7 00025275 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 9 8 000252CC > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 10 9 00025321 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 11 A 00022EE1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 12 B 00023D91 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 13 C 000233A7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 14 D 0002463E [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 15 E 00022EEB [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 16 F 00023F13 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 17 10 00023EF8 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 18 11 00023EDB [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 19 12 00023E20 getLayoutTables > > 20 13 00023DBD getUnitsPerEmForLayout > > 21 14 00023055 isNullScalerContext > > 22 15 00022C03 setSunFontIDs > > > > Summary > > > > 1000 .data > > 7000 .rdata > > 2000 .reloc > > 1000 .rsrc > > 25000 .text > > > > As you can see, those missing four functions *are* there, in T2K.dll, > but > > don't have the leading underscore, which somehow the compiler thinks is > > there. My guess is that there's a calling convention mixup here somehow, > or > > else the T2K.lib is somehow written to insert the leading underscores > there. > > (Which then implies it's not just a straightforward import library, I > > think.) Is it possible that there's a macro somewhere in the native code > > that's inserting an underscore when it shouldn't? > > > > Ted Neward > > Java, .NET, XML Services > > Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing > > http://www.tedneward.com > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 7:02 AM > >> To: Ted Neward > >> Cc: build-dev@openjdk.java.net > >> Subject: Re: New bug in build process > >> > >> Is this t2k.lib file the one you created from t2k.dll? > >> > >> I've never seen these errors before, but it looks like it's in the > >> fastdebug build, which would mean you got past the product build, > >> which is significant. > >> > >> This is just a wild guess, but I wonder if the debug t2k.dll file has > more > >> external symbols than the product one? I'm not that familiar with > >> the external list for this library. > >> > >> --- > >> > >> Keep in mind that although we regularly build the fastdebug bits (-g - > O), > >> and > >> some developers build the debug bits (-g), neither are tested very > >> extensively. > >> With the exception of the Hotspot VM, which gets tested fairly well > with > >> VM type tests. > >> It's the product built bits that get most of the formal JDK testing > done > >> to them. > >> > >> Product .obj/.o files should end up in a obj directory (under > >> build/*/tmp), > >> fastdebug ones in obj_gO, and debug ones in obj_g. I'm curious why you > are > >> seeing > >> some obj_gO references and some obj_g references. Maybe there is > another > >> bug in > >> the BinaryPlugs.gmk file... :^( > >> > >> -kto > >> > >> Ted Neward wrote: > >>> After doing a “nuke” of the build dir, and doing a fresh “make > >>> debug_build DEV=1” (again, on Windows), I get this: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Creating library > >>> c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~2/tmp/sun/sun.fo > >>> > >>> nt/fontmanager/obj_gO/fontmanager.lib and object > >>> c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/ > >>> > >>> build/WINDOW~2/tmp/sun/sun.font/fontmanager/obj_gO/fontmanager.exp > >>> > >>> sunFont.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol _setSunFontIDs > >>> reference > >>> > >>> d in function [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> sunFont.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol > >>> _isNullScalerContext ref > >>> > >>> erenced in function [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> SunLayoutEngine.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol > >>> _getUnitsPerEmFo > >>> > >>> rLayout referenced in function "public: virtual long __thiscall > >>> FontInstanceAdap > >>> > >>> ter::getUnitsPerEM(void)const " > >> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]@@UBEJXZ) > >>> FontInstanceAdapter.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol > >>> _getUnitsPer > >>> > >>> EmForLayout > >>> > >>> FontInstanceAdapter.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol > >>> _getLayoutTa > >>> > >>> bles referenced in function "public: __thiscall > >>> FontInstanceAdapter::FontInstanc > >>> > >>> eAdapter(struct JNIEnv_ *,class _jobject *,class _jobject *,float > >>> *,long,long)" > >>> > >>> (??0FontInstanceAdapter@@[EMAIL PROTECTED]@@PAV_jobject@@[EMAIL > >>> PROTECTED]) > >>> > >>> > >> > c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~2/tmp/sun/sun.font/fontmanager > >> /obj_g > >>> O/fontmanager.dll : fatal error LNK1120: 4 unresolved externals > >>> > >>> make[5]: *** > >>> [c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~2/bin/fontmanager.dll] > >>> > >>> Error 96 > >>> > >>> make[5]: Leaving directory > >>> `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make/sun/font' > >>> > >>> make[4]: *** [all] Error 1 > >>> > >>> make[4]: Leaving directory > >> `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make/sun' > >>> make[3]: *** [all] Error 1 > >>> > >>> make[3]: Leaving directory `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make' > >>> > >>> make[2]: *** [j2se-build] Error 2 > >>> > >>> make[2]: Leaving directory > >> `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/make' > >>> make[1]: *** [generic_debug_build] Error 2 > >>> > >>> make[1]: Leaving directory > >> `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/make' > >>> make: *** [fastdebug_build] Error 2 > >>> > >>> CYGWIN:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/make > >>> > >>> $ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Apparently there’s some missing object files in the link step of > >>> fontmanager.lib; any ideas? Intuition tells me this is t2k.lib-related > >>> again, since we’re back in the silly font directory again, and yes, I > >>> know, t2k is going away soon, but I’d like to see if it can be worked > >>> around in the meantime. Legal issues have this annoying tendency to > take > >>> MUCH longer than engineers think they should… :-) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> The build output prior to this link line is pretty verbose, but I can > >>> send it if it’ll help debug the problem…. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Ted Neward > >>> > >>> Java, .NET, XML Services > >>> > >>> Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing > >>> > >>> http://www.tedneward.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> No virus found in this outgoing message. > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.23/924 - Release Date: > >>> 7/28/2007 3:50 PM > >>> > >> No virus found in this incoming message. > >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.23/924 - Release Date: > 7/28/2007 > >> 3:50 PM > >> > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/929 - Release Date: > 7/31/2007 > > 5:26 PM > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/929 - Release Date: 7/31/2007 > 5:26 PM > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/929 - Release Date: 7/31/2007 5:26 PM
