On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 01:03:28 GMT, Jiangli Zhou <[email protected]> wrote:
> Initial implementation for supporting building a fully statically linked
> (with a desired set of JDK native libraries and libjvm) Java launcher
> executable, which is named as 'javastatic'.
>
> In this PR, the support is only added for the linux platform. Both gcc and
> clang can be supported. For current demo/testing purpose, the bin/javastatic
> is statically linked with awt headless and other common JDK native libraries.
> The current PR doesn't fully handle creating the bundle for a static JDK
> image, which can be supported later.
>
> To build the statically linked executable:
>
> 1. Configure the JDK build with --with-static-java=yes
> 2. Build static-java-image, e.g. 'make jdk-image static-java-image'
>
> The 'javastatic' binary created by the static-java-image target is not
> runnable. The runtime issues will be handled separately.
>
> Following is a summary of the changes in this PR:
>
> - Add make/autoconf/static-java.m4 for defining STATIC_JAVA_SETUP. Add
> STATIC_JAVA_SETUP to make/autoconf/configure.ac.
>
> - Changes in make/Main.gmk
> - Add HOTSPOT_VARIANT_STATIC_LIBS_TARGETS and
> DeclareHotspotStaticLibsRecipe for building libjvm static library.
> - Add static-java-image for creating the fully statically linked standard
> Java launcher binary, bin/javastatic. The build process also places libjvm.a
> into the 'static-libs' image lib/ directory.
>
> - Add make/StaticLink.gmk, which contains the main support for creating the
> fully statically linked Java launcher binary.
>
> - Setup LDFLAGS_CXX_STATIC_JDK based on $TOOLCHAIN_TYPE in
> make/autoconf/flags-ldflags.m4.
>
> - Always use bundled libraries for zlib, freetype, etc for static build
> support. The related changes are in make/autoconf/lib-bundled.m4 and
> make/autoconf/lib-freetype.m4. Building the bundled zlib, freetype and etc
> libraries ensures those libraries are included in the JDK binary bundle. It
> decouples the assumptions/requirements of the static Java image build process
> from the assumptions/requirements of the JDK build process. A post process
> that builds the static Java image can use those bundled libraries provided by
> JDK binary if needed.
>
> - When building a fully statically linked java launcher executable, the
> --whole-archive linker option is used for the JDK/VM static libraries to make
> sure it links every object (.o) file provided by those static libraries. As a
> result, we need to remove any duplicate object files from the different
> JDK/VM static libraries. To do that, STATIC_LIB_EXCLUDE_OBJS is added and
> used in make/common/NativeCompilation.gmk. STATIC_LIB_EXCLUDE_OBJS contains
> the list of object files that need to be filtered out when creating a
> specific static library. STATIC_LIB_EXCLUDE_OBJS is defined for JDK/VM static
> libraries that may contain object files from other libraries (those are
> needed when building shared libraries), and those object files are added to
> the STATIC_LIB_EXCLUDE_OBJS. See make/hotspot/lib/CompileJvm.gmk,
> make/modules/java.base/lib/CoreLibraries.gmk and
> make/modules/java.desktop/lib/Awt2dLibraries.gmk.
>
> - In make/common/NativeCompilation.gmk, move the code handling long arguments
> so that it can be used for the static build support as well.
>
> - In make/hotspot/lib/CompileJvm.gmk, it specifies to exclude operator_new.o
> from the libjvm static library. See details in the comment added in
> CompileJvm.gmk.
>
> Thanks manc for a bug fix for JAVASTATIC_OBJECT_DIR in StaticLink.gmk.
make/autoconf/lib-freetype.m4 line 118:
> 116: if test "x${STATIC_JAVA}" = "xtrue"; then
> 117: AC_MSG_ERROR([--with-freetype=system does not work with
> --with-static-java=yes])
> 118: fi
Why not ? Surely you aren't statically linking every library you find on the
platform that's referenced by JDK ?
I mean its fine to say that I'd prefer to statically link this library, but I
don't understand the claim that this is the only thing that can work ?
make/modules/java.desktop/lib/Awt2dLibraries.gmk line 229:
> 227: LIBAWT_XAWT_STATIC_EXCLUDE_OBJS := \
> 228: debug_assert.o debug_util.o debug_trace.o debug_mem.o systemScale.o
> 229:
Umm. Does this mean you are linking both headless and xawt into the same image ?
You are on your own with that. Sounds like a mistake to me and I don't want to
see any
proposed source code changes to fix up any issues you see later.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13709#discussion_r1180701495
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13709#discussion_r1180704385
