On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 10:35:20 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <i...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> It seems correct to include the output dir in the remapping, but I have two >> objections/questions to the way you are doing it. >> 1) Why not just use OUTPUTDIR instead of the two specialized subdirs? That >> is simpler, more general and future-proof. >> 2) Why not expand the value of the OUTPUTDIR variable? I.e. >> >> DEBUG_PREFIX_CFLAGS="$DEBUG_PREFIX_CFLAGS -fdebug-prefix-map=$OUTPUTDIR/=" >> ``` >> >> instead of trying to preserve it as a variable to be expanded in the make >> execution. > > Also, this mapping business is getting really convoluted. :-( I did not like > it as it was, and this patch makes it even worse. I think we need to rewrite > this to create some kind of dict/map, and then iterate over the map and apply > `-fdebug-prefix-map` to all items in the map. Unfortunately, the data > structures available in shell scripts is limited and will make this a bit > tricky to pull off. :( > It seems correct to include the output dir in the remapping, but I have two > objections/questions to the way you are doing it. > > 1. Why not just use OUTPUTDIR instead of the two specialized subdirs? > That is simpler, more general and future-proof. > > 2. Why not expand the value of the OUTPUTDIR variable? I.e. > > > ``` > DEBUG_PREFIX_CFLAGS="$DEBUG_PREFIX_CFLAGS -fdebug-prefix-map=$OUTPUTDIR/=" > ``` > > instead of trying to preserve it as a variable to be expanded in the make > execution. Ah thanks @magicus I hadn't seen that existed! that would simplify it, i'll try that now ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18009#discussion_r1504043380