On 06/17/2013 05:21 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 6/17/13 4:02 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Rule #1 Nobody reads the README
Rule #2 When things go wrong, blame the README
I of course have no objection to the change, however, I'm not
convinced it will
help much the next time someone runs into this. :^(
Hi Kelly! You still read this stuff here? :-)
Yeah, I have no illusions that changing the README will prevent many,
if any, future occurrences of this problem. However, we had an
internal discussion on this incident where the N-1 rule was asserted.
There was no dispute about the rule, but I went off to find where it
was documented, and found only the fairly weak statement in the
README. So, at the very least, that ought to be fixed.
A stronger step would be to modify configure to check the version of
the boot JDK and to complain if it doesn't match N-1. Or perhaps even
N-1 and update >= 7. What do you think? I was considering filing an RFE.
A restriction in configure would probably be more effective at
preventing these kinds of errors.
s'marks
Stuart,
At least make sure you don't break "make bootcycle-images" which
deliberately uses the newly built JDK to build itself again.
-- Jon