New webrev with two-line change to flags.m4 at line 1129.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8184022/webrev.03/
“xno” now means “use build system default”, just as if the switch had not been
used.
I’m a very inexperienced regex user, so I used what worked first for me. What
would it look like to escape the whole expression or sub-expressions?
Paul
On 7/13/17, 10:04 AM, "Erik Joelsson" <erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote:
This looks pretty good. A few points:
* Please use $GREP since configure is doing some work on finding a good
grep for us. If you want to make the grep patterns more readable, it's
possible to put the [] escapes around the whole expression, or at any
level you wish. That way you don't need to repeat them for each [0-9].
Both styles are used throughout the configure script and I don't have a
strong preference myself.
* The check for "no" got me thinking. If someone explicitly sets
--without-macosx-version-max, that probably means they want it empty.
The reason for doing so would be to override an earlier instance of the
parameter on the command line (set by some script or automatic system
that you can't directly influence). This is not a likely usecase but is
perhaps a more correct action. Sorry for confusing this earlier. "yes"
is definitely an error though.
I took this patch for a run here and it seems to work as it should from
the Oracle point of view.
/Erik
On 2017-07-13 17:46, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> New webrev
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8184022/webrev.02/
>
> It includes –with-macosx-version-max format checks (disallows
–without-macosx-version-max) and your jib-profiles.js patch. I put the checking
logic in AC_ARG_WITH based on the code in basics.m4 line 597 that defines
BASIC_SETUP_DEVKIT.
>
> --with-macosx-version-max will fail the format checks and
–without-macosx-version-max will fail the check against ‘xno’.
>
> Paul
>
> On 7/12/17, 1:15 AM, "Erik Joelsson" <erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
> On 2017-07-12 03:19, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> > New webrev at
> >
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8184022/webrev.01/
> For the AC_ARG_WITH, we usually refrain from using the builtin
"if-set,
> if-not-set" parameters and define our own logic to handle all 4
> possibilities: not set, --with-foobar=value, --with-foobar and
> --without-foobar. The latter two results in the values "yes" and
"no"
> respectively and in this case those two are invalid and needs to
result
> in errors. Also since we are expecting a very specific format on the
> input, we need to validate this format so we fail fast instead of
> getting weird compile errors much later.
>
> My understanding of -mmacosx-version-min is that it sets
> MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MIN_REQUIRED for you so no need to add that. OTOH,
it
> makes it more obvious where this comes from if anyone stumbles on
it in
> the source.
> > I defined a new shell variable MACOSX_VERSION_MAX which is settable via a new
configure switch –with-macosx-version-max=<version>. Example use:
--with-macosx-version-max=10.12.00. The specified version is passed via a compiler command line
switch, vis –DMAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED=101200 (de-dotted <version>).
> At what point did they introduce the double zeros at the end? Seems
like
> we will need guard the values quite carefully and make sure we zero
pad
> if needed.
> > MACOSX_VERSION_MIN remains hardcoded to 10.7.0, but is now passed
to the compilers via -DMAC_OS_X_VERSION_MIN_REQUIRED=1070 rather than via
-DMAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED=1070.
> >
> > Tested by attempting builds on OSX 10.12.04.
> >
> > (1) no –with-macosx-version-max: succeeds as expected because no
–DMAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED passed to compilers, so defaults to 10.12.04.
> > (2) –with-macosx-version-max=10.11.00: fails as expected due to
formal parameter type mismatch.
> > (3) –with-macosx-version-max=10.12.00: succeeds as expected
because formal parameter types are the same for all 10.12.xx.
> >
> > It’d be great if you could try it out.
> >
> > Note that successful cases (1) and (3) above provoke three
warnings which I haven’t investigated. Imo, I/we can figure out how to get rid of
these next/later.
> >
> > ld: warning: object file
(/Users/hohensee/workspaces/jdk10-hs/build/macosx-x86_64-normal-server-release/support/native/java.base//libfdlibm.a)
was built for newer OSX version (10.12) than being linked (10.7)
> > ld: warning: object file
(/Users/hohensee/workspaces/jdk10-hs/build/macosx-x86_64-normal-server-release/support/native/java.base/libjli_static.a)
was built for newer OSX version (10.12) than being linked (10.7)
> > clang: warning: libstdc++ is deprecated; move to libc++ with a
minimum deployment target of OS X 10.9 [-Wdeprecated]
> I believe the warnings for static libs is simply caused by not
adding
> -mmacosx-version-min to the ARFLAGS. Not sure if ar on mac takes
that
> flag though.
>
> The libstdc++ warning seems harder to work around until we change
the
> minimum to 10.9 instead of 10.7.
>
> I would appreciate if you could also include this patch as part of
this
> change to make Oracle builds still behave as before:
>
> diff -r a6c830ee8a67 common/conf/jib-profiles.js
> --- a/common/conf/jib-profiles.js
> +++ b/common/conf/jib-profiles.js
> @@ -436,7 +436,8 @@
> target_os: "macosx",
> target_cpu: "x64",
> dependencies: ["devkit"],
> - configure_args: concat(common.configure_args_64bit,
> "--with-zlib=system"),
> + configure_args: concat(common.configure_args_64bit,
> "--with-zlib=system",
> + "--with-macosx-version-max=10.7.0"),
> },
>
> "solaris-x64": {
>
>
> Thanks!
> /Erik
> > Paul
> >
> > On 7/11/17, 2:45 AM, "Erik Joelsson" <erik.joels...@oracle.com>
wrote:
> >
> > The -DMAC_OSX_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED and -mmacosx-version-min
arguments are
> > used in combination to achieve the same thing. I chose to
use both to
> > really enforce full compatibility with the specified
version. The
> > "official" way of targeting earlier versions of the OS is
just using
> > -mmacosx-version-min. This will however still accept uses of
newer APIs,
> > but at link time, those will be linked with weak_import.
Essentially
> > it's expected that your application should be able to do
without these
> > calls if necessary, at the application level. While better
than not
> > being able to launch at all on the older OS, by adding
> > -DMAC_OSX_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED, it becomes a compile time
error if any
> > code tries to use a newer API.
> >
> > As I see it, either we fully enforce this at build time, or
we don't at
> > all. The natural default is to build for the current host
platform. The
> > configure parameter would make it possible to enforce a
minimal
> > compatible OS version that the binaries must be usable on.
> >
> > (Note that if you propose such a change, I will need to add
the Oracle
> > bit as well, where we use the parameter, which would need to
go in at
> > the same time in common/conf/jib-profiles.js. Also note that
I will be
> > on vacation for 5 weeks starting this weekend so won't be
around to
> > review for most of that time.)
> >
> > /Erik
> >
> >
> > On 2017-07-10 19:48, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> > > That’s a good idea, though the option would be
--with-macosx-version-max=<n>, right? The minimum is currently hard-coded and should
probably stay that way since there’s likely a lot of code that depends on it. Let me see what
I can come up with.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > On 7/10/17, 10:01 AM, "Erik Joelsson"
<erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2017-07-10 18:09, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> > > > Hi Erik,
> > > >
> > > > The problem is that the compiler doesn’t issue a
warning in this case, but rather a type-mismatch error on NSEventMask, so I can’t turn it
off. NSUInteger was being used as an enum, so Apple changed to using a real enum in 10.12
as a matter of code hygiene. The new code in NSApplicationAWT.m is doing the right thing by
checking MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED.
> > > >
> > > > What particular problem were you trying to solve?
Production, QA and JPRT builds and test runs are done on the oldest supported OSX version,
so any use of newer features should be detected very early in the test process. Restricting
builds to old OSX versions means that engineers who keep their development boxes up to date
(which they should: security, etc.) can’t use them to do JDK development.
> > > That's not exactly true. Apple is making it very hard
to stay on older
> > > versions of the OS compared to other OS vendors. For
this reason we are
> > > not always able to stay on a particular version for
Macosx in
> > > particular. We also in general try to avoid having to
fill our build
> > > servers/environments with just the oldest OSes,
because older OSes are
> > > harder to maintain and less convenient to work with.
So instead, we try
> > > to maintain working build environments on newer OSes
that produce
> > > binaries that are compatible with the oldest we
support. So, at least
> > > from Oracle's perspective, we prefer if builds on
different OS versions
> > > produce equivalent binaries when possible. We
certainly don't want to
> > > prevent building on newer OS/compilers.
> > >
> > > If this can't be worked around at the source level,
then perhaps we need
> > > to consider hiding this macro definition behind a
configure option that
> > > we can use internally. I would be open to that.
Something like
> > > --with-macosx-version-min=10.7 which configure could
then translate to
> > > the combination of options currently used. That way,
most openjdk
> > > developers/builders would not need to suffer this
Oracle requirement.
> > >
> > > /Erik
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > On 7/10/17, 1:10 AM, "Erik Joelsson"
<erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I do not agree to removing that macro. I added
those options to help
> > > > guarantee that a build made on a newer version
of macosx would still run
> > > > on the oldest version currently supported. The
macro is not mainly meant
> > > > to be used in our code, but is picked up by
system headers to cause an
> > > > error if any features newer than 10.7 are
used. It may be that we should
> > > > bump it to a newer version of macosx in JDK
10, but certainly not to 10.12.
> > > >
> > > > It seems to me that we instead need to ignore
the particular warning for
> > > > this case.
> > > >
> > > > /Erik
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2017-07-09 15:26, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> > > > > Please review the following change to get
JDK10 to build on OSX 10.12 and above.
> > > > >
> > > > >
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8184022
> > > > >
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8184022/webrev.00/
> > > > >
> > > > > I’d very much appreciate a sponsor for this
fix. Imo, successful JDK10 builds on all supported platforms would be sufficient testing, but
please let me know what I can do to help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Slightly revised from the RFE:
> > > > >
> > > > >
JDK-8182299<https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182299> enabled previously disabled
clang warnings and was intended to also enable builds on OSX 10 + Xcode 8. Due to a mixup, this code
in jdk/src/java.desktop/macosx/native/libosxapp/NSApplicationAWT.m
> > > > >
> > > > > #if defined(MAC_OS_X_VERSION_10_12) && \
> > > > > MAC_OS_X_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED >=
MAC_OS_X_VERSION_10_12 && \
> > > > > __LP64__
> > > > > / 10.12 changed `mask` to NSEventMask
(unsigned long long) for x86_64 builds.
> > > > > - (NSEvent
*)nextEventMatchingMask:(NSEventMask)mask
> > > > > #else
> > > > > - (NSEvent
*)nextEventMatchingMask:(NSUInteger)mask
> > > > > #endif
> > > > > untilDate:(NSDate *)expiration
inMode:(NSString *)mode dequeue:(BOOL)deqFlag {
> > > > >
> > > > > works fine with OSX versions earlier than
10.12, but fails to compile starting with OSX 10.12 due to MAC_OSX_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED being
defined on the compile command line as 10.7.
> > > > >
> > > > > The fix is to remove that definition, since it
places an artificial upper bound on the OSX version under which JDK10 can be built. A source code
search reveals no uses of MAC_OSX_VERSION_MAX_ALLOWED other than in NSApplicationAWT.m and
hotspot/src/os_cpu/bsd_x86/vm/os_bsd_x86.cpp. The latter won't be affected by this change, since
it checks for a version > 10.5, which is always true in JDK10.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Paul
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
