On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:54:01 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <sh...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Looks good! I did a similar attempt at cross building a while ago, but never >> got around to finishing it, so it's nice to see it materializing! I do have >> a general comment on reducing the amount of duplicated content though. Since >> all these cross-build platforms share the same prerequisites, they can be >> expressed as matrix builds. Here's what I did: >> https://github.com/rwestberg/jdk/blob/947c934621c3013c055152356615e0120382cedf/.github/workflows/submit.yml#L102 >> >> You'd have to adjust the details obviously, but I think it could help with >> future maintainability. >> >> Another minor comment is that it may be faster to use >> http://debian-archive.trafficmanager.net/debian/ instead of >> http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ (the former is Azure-specific but I >> don't think it's part of the list that the latter uses). But since it will >> be cached after first use it probably doesn't matter much. > >> Looks good! I did a similar attempt at cross building a while ago, but never >> got around to finishing it, so it's nice to see it materializing! I do have >> a general comment on reducing the amount of duplicated content though. Since >> all these cross-build platforms share the same prerequisites, they can be >> expressed as matrix builds. Here's what I did: >> https://github.com/rwestberg/jdk/blob/947c934621c3013c055152356615e0120382cedf/.github/workflows/submit.yml#L102 > > Right. AFAIU your code, it bootstraps the chroot and builds x86_64 build JDK > for every config and every run, something this PR is able to avoid. We'd need > to figure that out. I think that is pretty doable, but it would require a few > days worth of pipeline testing to work out the kinks. So, would you mind we > do that in the follow-ups? Yeah, it would certainly need a bit of adaptation to capture the differences properly, so perfectly fine to look into later! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1147
