Thanks a lot David! Regards, Volker
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:37 AM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote: > Pushing to jdk9/hs under the "trivial - 1 Reviewer" rule > > David > > > On 7/06/2016 5:07 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 4:28 AM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Volker, >>> >>> On 6/06/2016 11:59 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'd like to get the following tiny bug fix into jdk9-dev. What's the >>>> current procedure to get this change approved? >>> >>> >>> >>> No approvals needed for bug fixes until RDP1 later in the year. Only >>> enhancements need approval post FC and that process has not yet been >>> setup. >>> >> >> Ah, good to know. >> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8158763/ >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8158763 >>>> >>>> On Solaris, the configure test for libstlport.so.1 isn't disabled by >>>> --disable-hotspot-gtest. So, if libstlport.so.1 isn't present, the >>>> build will break during configuration even if we set >>>> --disable-hotspot-gtest. >>>> >>>> The fix is trivial - just guard the test for libstlport.so.1 by >>>> "x$BUILD_GTEST" = "xtrue". >>>> >>>> The fix also adds an alternative location for libstlport.so.1 (from >>>> SS12u3) to keep the sources compilable with SS12u3. >>> >>> >>> >>> This looks fine to me and I can sponsor it (need to regenerate closed >>> generated-configure.sh). I'd also prefer to see this go into jdk9/hs if >>> that >>> is okay? >>> >> >> Thanks a lot David. Pushing it to jdk9/hs first is fine for me. >> >> Regards, >> Volker >> >>> Thanks, >>> David >>> ----- >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Thank you and best regards, >>>> Volker >>>> >>> >
