On Jul 31, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
About a year ago I did build the complete Hotspot and J2SE code
using VS2005 Express + MS Platform SDK + DirectX SDK - all
downloaded for free from the Microsoft web-site. During building I
identified some bugs (to name a few: 6486546, 6488751, 6523947).
Some of them belonging to the J2SE code I've fixed myself, some
were fixed by the Hotspot team. AFAIR, apart from the problem with
the manifest files (see 6523947) I don't recall any unresolved
issues... Are there any?
I don't know either.
You can contact with Ted Neward ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), he's in charge
of a selected "OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge" named
"OpenJDK on Windows".
Below is a copy of what he wants to achieve. Notice the "My goal is
to ensure that I hit #1 by the close of the project period (August)",
which is the VC++ Express goal.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ted Neward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: March 19, 2008 12:11:14 PM CST
To: build-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: FW: Announcing Finalists for the OpenJDK Community
Innovator's Challenge
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
-Max
On Jul 31, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
About a year ago I did build the complete Hotspot and J2SE code
using VS2005 Express + MS Platform SDK + DirectX SDK - all
downloaded for free from the Microsoft web-site. During building I
identified some bugs (to name a few: 6486546, 6488751, 6523947).
Some of them belonging to the J2SE code I've fixed myself, some
were fixed by the Hotspot team. AFAIR, apart from the problem with
the manifest files (see 6523947) I don't recall any unresolved
issues... Are there any?
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 07/30/2008 08:23 PM Kelly O'Hair wrote:
We are focusing on the Professional edition first because the free
Express edition does not include the ATL include or lib files.
I'm not an ATL expert, but JDK builds have a dependence on it and
it's
probably not going away for quite some time I'm told.
It's quite possible that much of the OpenJDK is very buildable
with the
free Express edition, and once we are building with the Professional
edition, someone can see how much is buildable with the Express
edition.
-kto
Anthony Petrov wrote:
On 07/29/2008 11:03 PM Erik Trimble wrote:
I certainly can't speak for Sun on this. But, I don't think
there is any immediate plans to use GCC on Windows. It would
probably be OK if someone wanted to try, but I can't imagine it
being even remotely easy. There's just so much stuff dependent
on the various Visual Studio or MS SDK header files, that I'm
almost positive you have to install them to do the build, so why
bother with GCC? (even from a Free Software point of view, if
you can't get away from the proprietary MS SDK/VisStudio, then
compiling with GCC rather than the MS-provided one isn't going
to be really any win at all).
Indeed. But we should make it possible to use the free versions
of the MS Visual Studio at least.
--
best regards,
Anthony
