Added back runtime to the cc list

On 9/02/2012 7:33 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
New webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/7141244/webrev.02/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eerikj/7141244/webrev.02/>
177 lines changed: 89 ins; 29 del; 59 mod; 3970 unchg

Changes since last time:

* Moved the , to after $(SPEC)
* Changed comment in gcc/sparcWorks.make according to suggestion from
Fredrik.

Haven't changed anything regarding the nmake files.

That's okay - it was just an observation.

Seems okay to me. Let's see if we can get Kelly or someone else from HS to comment.

David
-----

/Erik

On 2012-02-09 10:09, Erik Joelsson wrote:

On 2012-02-09 03:51, David Holmes wrote:
make/defs.make:

+ ifneq (,$(SPEC))
+ include $(SPEC)
+ endif

Having the blank first looks odd. I assume you aren't using -inlcude
because you want to see errors if SPEC is set but not found.

I guess it's an unconscious habit from java where you rather do
"".equals(something) to avoid NPE. I will switch it around. And the
assumption is correct. We used -include at first, but I figured that
we wanted to know if the include failed at least on the root level
Makefile.
make/windows/makefiles/compile.make:

The definitions of MT=mt.exe in each block for the different VS
versions seems redundant. If we factor this out is there any reason
not to group:

CXX=cl.exe
MT=mt.exe
RC=rc.exe
LD=link.exe

together and use the same "if (,$(SPEC))" approach?

Grouping them together would certainly look nicer, but MT isn't set
for every possible compiler version. Not sure if that matters since we
don't support older versions anyway, right?

As for testing for SPEC, this is nmake and the SPEC file is only
gnumake compatible. CXX, MT, RC and LD are sent in to nmake on the
command line from gnumake. They are then generated into local.make
which is in turn included by sub invocations of nmake. Sending in SPEC
as well seemed redundant to me, but we could send it in as a flag
signaling that configure should be in control. Wouldn't look obviously
better to me though. I'm open for suggestions.

/Erik

Reply via email to