Am Donnerstag, den 08.01.2015 um 21:20 +1000 schrieb David Holmes: > On 8/01/2015 9:05 PM, Roman Kennke wrote: > > Oh and notice that if you try to build it yourself, use a version of > > LLVM < 3.5. In 3.5, C++11 is used/required, and OpenJDK doesn't support > > C++11 yet. (are there any plans about this?) I'd recommend LLVM 3.4.2. > > C++11? We still have workarounds for compilers that don't support C99 :(
Well ok, fair enough ;-) I guess for my purposes it's good enough to pass some GCC flag to turn on C++11 support, so that the new LLVM headers can be used. That's all that I need. Roman > > David > > > Roman > > > > Am Donnerstag, den 08.01.2015 um 11:03 +0100 schrieb Erik Joelsson: > >> Hello Roman, > >> > >> This addition looks good to me. > >> > >> Thinking about what the others said, it might be inconvenient to have > >> all this be pushed to different forests. I tried applying all the > >> changes to jdk9/hs-rt, but I can't seem to build zeroshark.. Did you > >> have more hotspot changes to be able to finish the build? > >> > >> My failure is: > >> > >> ciTypeFlow.o > >> /localhome/hg/jdk9-hs-rt/hotspot/src/share/vm/ci/ciTypeFlow.cpp > >> In file included from > >> /localhome/hg/jdk9-hs-rt/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/regmask.hpp:29:0, > >> from > >> /localhome/hg/jdk9-hs-rt/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/compile.hpp:40, > >> from > >> /localhome/hg/jdk9-hs-rt/hotspot/src/share/vm/ci/ciTypeFlow.cpp:38: > >> /localhome/hg/jdk9-hs-rt/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/optoreg.hpp:40:39: > >> fatal error: adfiles/adGlobals_zero.hpp: No such file or directory > >> > >> From what I can see, adfiles are not generated for zero or zeroshark > >> builds, so the include should probably be removed. > >> > >> Would you still like me to push what you currently have to hs-rt? > >> > >> /Erik > >> > >> On 2015-01-07 21:21, Roman Kennke wrote: > >>> Hi Erik, > >>> > >>> When I built Zero and Shark on my Raspberry Pi, I noticed another > >>> problem when copying jvm.cfg into the right places. I fixed it in a > >>> similar way as I did for the SA stuff: > >>> > >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark-build-jdk/webrev.02/ > >>> > >>> I think that should be all for now. > >>> > >>> Please push that into JDK9 if you think that's fine. > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Roman > >>> > >>> Am Mittwoch, den 07.01.2015 um 17:49 +0100 schrieb Erik Joelsson: > >>>> On 2015-01-07 17:29, Roman Kennke wrote: > >>>>> Am Mittwoch, den 07.01.2015 um 17:16 +0100 schrieb Erik Joelsson: > >>>>>> On 2015-01-07 17:11, Roman Kennke wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi Erik, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Do you have a bug for this? > >>>>>>> No. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I haven't pushed any changes to JDK in a while. Is it possible in the > >>>>>>> meantime for me to create my own bugs? Otherwise, please file one for > >>>>>>> me :-) > >>>>>> You should be able to log in to https://bugs.openjdk.java.net and > >>>>>> create > >>>>>> bugs since you have an OpenJDK identity. > >>>>> Done: > >>>>> > >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068598 > >>>>> > >>>>> While I'm at it, is it possible for me to push my own changes (except > >>>>> hotspot of course)? If yes, what needs to be done for regenerating the > >>>>> configure files? Simply run autogen.sh in common/autoconf with whatever > >>>>> version of autotools I have? Or doesn't it make sense at all b/c you > >>>>> need to regenerate your closed scripts? > >>>> It requires you to run common/autogen.sh yes, and that will require you > >>>> to have autoconf 2.69 installed. But since we also need to regenerate > >>>> the closed version, I can take care of the push for you. Will do it > >>>> tomorrow if that's ok? > >>>> > >>>> /Erik > >>>>> Roman > >>>>> > >>> > >> > > > >
