> So, if I'm reading this correctly, the project is to make the build on > Windows both easier and Free? Your initial proposal was a little > unclear (at least to me), and I couldn't work out whether or not you > were proposing shifting from a Free build system (Cygwin) to a > non-Free one (MSVC). This sounds different again, so it would be > great to have some clarification. I'm speaking merely as an observer > here; I have enough problems building OpenJDK on GNU/Linux. I > wouldn't even want to attempt it on a Windows installation, so great > job in taking that on! :) > The Windows builds have always used *both* Cygwin and MSVC; Cygwin for the make and other Unix-based file tools (cp, rm, awk, sed, etc), and MSVC for the actual compilation of C/C++ code. (Prior to a few years ago, in fact, it wasn't even Cygwin, it was using MKS, a commercial Unix toolchain for Windows.)
My proposal was to move away from the commercial version of MSVC (Visual Studio 2003 and/or Microsoft Visual C++ 6.x are the currently-supported versions of MSVC for building the JDK on Windows) and start using the free version of MSVC (Visual C++ 2008 Express), before attempting moving away from MSVC entirely and using MinGW32's gcc (which is much closer to the underlying OS than Cygwin is). I'm confident step 1 can happen. I'm reasonably confident #2 can happen. I have no idea of step #3 is even remotely possible, but figure it's worth the look, if the time is there. Ted Neward Java, .NET, XML Services Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing http://www.tedneward.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Andrew John Hughes > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008 1:48 AM > To: Ted Neward > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: FW: Announcing Finalists for the OpenJDK Community > Innovator's Challenge > > On 19/03/2008, Ted Neward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Given that it would appear that my proposal for updating the build > process > > to use a free compiler has apparently been accepted (see below), is > there a > > good time to start thinking about doing the migration work? Are > there any > > major build changes up & coming? I know Kelly has said there's some > plans to > > move the corba project out to an entirely Ant-driven process, so if > that's > > going to happen any time soon, I'll just leave it out of the > migration > > process. (I think the corba stuff still uses the C compiler for some > of it, > > no?) > > > > There's a two-step process I want to take with this: > > 1) Let's leave most of the build infrastructure in place and just > try to > > swap in Visual C++ 2008 Express. > > 2) Let's see about moving over to MinGW32's infrastructure (instead > of > > Cygwin's) and see if that doesn't help reduce the path problems > we're > > currently facing in the Windows build of OpenJDK. > > 2) Let's see about moving over to the MinGW32 gcc compiler for > building on > > windows, and thus remove the dependency on Microsoft's compiler > completely, > > in case VC++ ever moves out of a free (as in beer or as in speech) > SKU. > > > > My goal is to ensure that I hit #1 by the close of the project > period > > (August), and get as far down 2 and 3 as possible. > > > > Any thoughts? Suggestions? Ideas for how best to tackle this? You > (the guys > > at Sun) have a lot more experience with this codebase than I, so any > tips, > > pointers or suggestions are appreciated. > > > > Ted Neward > > Java, .NET, XML Services > > Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing > > http://www.tedneward.com > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:announce- > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rich Sands > > > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 6:54 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Announcing Finalists for the OpenJDK Community > Innovator's > > > Challenge > > > > > > OpenJDK Community, > > > > > > We're pleased to announce the finalists for the OpenJDK Community > > > Innovator's > > > Challenge. The judges have been meeting and discussing the 18 > proposals > > > received > > > during the first phase of the Challenge, and evaluating these > proposals > > > based on > > > their technical merit, and their likely impact on the OpenJDK > Community > > > and the > > > adoption of OpenJDK-based implementations in new markets, for new > > > applications and > > > uses. It was not an easy decision, as most of the proposals were > > > thoughtful and > > > demonstrated passion and commitment to this code base and the > > > community. The seven > > > Finalists, in order of receipt of their proposals, are: > > > > > > > > > Closures for Java Neal Gafter > > > > > > Implement XRender pipeline for Java2D Clemens > Eisserer > > > > > > Provide date and time library from JSR-310 Stephen > > > Colebourne, > > > Michael > > > Nascimento Santos > > > > > > Portable GUI backends Roman Kennke, > > > Mario Torre > > > > > > Virtual Machine Interface Andrew John > Hughes > > > > > > Free Software synthesizer implemention for > > > the OpenJDK project Karl Helgason > > > > > > OpenJDK on Windows Ted Neward > > > > > > > > > The judges, all Sun employees, are Alan Bateman, Alex Buckley, > Danny > > > Coward, Joe > > > Darcy, Ray Gans, James Gosling, Onno Kluyt, Jim Melvin, Alex > Potochkin, > > > Phil Race, > > > Mark Reinhold, and Rich Sands. > > > > > > We want to thank everyone who has entered their proposal into the > > > Challenge. It is > > > very exciting to see the level of enthusiasm and interest among > > > developers for the > > > OpenJDK code base. The finalists were chosen based on the > completeness > > > and relevance > > > of their proposals and the degree to which the judges felt the end > > > results were both > > > achievable and valuable to the community at this time. Proposals > that > > > were not > > > selected as finalists are still valuable and interesting but Sun > could > > > not select > > > them all! The judges hope that everyone who has participated so > far in > > > the Challenge > > > will consider continuing their efforts in the Community, and > > > collaborating with their > > > peers and with Sun to further the goals of the OpenJDK project. > > > > > > One other thing to remember -- there is no guarantee that > completed > > > Challenge > > > projects will be integrated into the main OpenJDK code base, or > into > > > the Java SE > > > Platform specification (which is governed by the JCP). Being > chosen as > > > a Finalist or > > > completing a project for the Challenge might help to demonstrate > the > > > feasibility of a > > > particular API or language proposal but it does not say anything > about > > > the likelihood > > > of such a project becoming an approved JSR, or about the code > being > > > integrated into > > > the main branch of the OpenJDK code base. Both the spec and the > code > > > are managed > > > under processes that are separate from the Challenge. > > > > > > The finalists will be notified and project space set up for them > if > > > needed in the > > > OpenJDK Community. As required by the Challenge rules, work must > be > > > done in the open, > > > and the entire OpenJDK community is welcome to watch and comment > as the > > > projects > > > progress. The Innovators Challenge will close on August 4th at > which > > > time each > > > project will be reviewed to verify that it met the completion > criteria > > > of its > > > proposal. Cash prizes will be awarded shortly afterwards. > > > > > > Thanks again to everyone who has participated. Good luck to all > > > Finalists on your > > > projects! > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > -- rms > > > > > > -- > > > Rich Sands Phone: +1 781 881 4067 / x81524 > > > Community Marketing Manager Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Java SE Marketing SMS: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sun Microsystems, Inc. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended > > > recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged > > > information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or > > > distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended > > > recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy > > > all copies of the original message. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > > Checked by AVG. > > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1332 - Release Date: > > > 3/17/2008 10:48 AM > > > > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG. > > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release Date: > 3/18/2008 > > 8:10 AM > > > > > > > > So, if I'm reading this correctly, the project is to make the build on > Windows both easier and Free? Your initial proposal was a little > unclear (at least to me), and I couldn't work out whether or not you > were proposing shifting from a Free build system (Cygwin) to a > non-Free one (MSVC). This sounds different again, so it would be > great to have some clarification. I'm speaking merely as an observer > here; I have enough problems building OpenJDK on GNU/Linux. I > wouldn't even want to attempt it on a Windows installation, so great > job in taking that on! :) > > Cheers, > -- > Andrew :-) > > Document Freedom Day - March 26th > http://documentfreedom.org > > Support Free Java! > Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > http://openjdk.java.net > > PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net) > Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8 > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release Date: > 3/18/2008 8:10 AM > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.21.7/1333 - Release Date: 3/18/2008 8:10 AM
