Joe, thanks for the review. I've pushed fixes for this problem to openjdk6 and openjdk7/tl
Martin On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 21:22, Joseph D. Darcy<joe.da...@sun.com> wrote: > Martin Buchholz wrote: >> >> Of course, it's all my fault. >> First, for having used a symbol that libc implementers are likely to add. >> Second, for actually asking glibc implementers to add that very symbol. >> Third, for forgetting that this is an issue in openjdk6 as well. >> >> Anyways, I intend to commit these patches to their respective forests: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk6/rename-execvpe/ >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk7/rename-execvpe/ >> >> As ever, we need a Sun bug (could Michael or Joe file it?): >> >> Synopsis: Rename execvpe to avoid symbol clash with glibc 2.10. >> Description: >> glibc 2.10 added the long-awaited "missing link" function execvpe >> (thank you! No really!) >> But the JDK already has a function of that name, which needs renaming, >> to avoid a compile time failure in UNIXProcess_md.c >> Evaluation: Yup >> >> Thanks, >> > > I've filed bug 6866719 and I approve the fix going back into 7 and OpenJDK > 6. > > Cheers, > > -Joe > >> Martin >> >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 08:24, Andrew John >> Hughes<gnu_and...@member.fsf.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> 2009/7/28 Martin Buchholz <marti...@google.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 06:08, Michael McMahon<michael.mcma...@sun.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2009/7/28 Michael McMahon <michael.mcma...@sun.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2009/7/9 Martin Buchholz <marti...@google.com>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> rename-execvpe is the one I'm particularly concerned about. It's a >>>>>> trivial patch, but without it, OpenJDK builds are going to start >>>>>> failing as distros move to the new glibc (e.g. Fedora 12). It's >>>>>> already an issue for users of Fedora rawhide. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ok. Maybe we can push rename-execvpe and RESTARTABLE first. >>>>> >>>> >>>> RESTARTABLE depends on vfork-exec, and I would not like to do >>>> the work to reorder them. >>>> >>>> Changes to fork-exec are always high-risk, >>>> and I would like to see some more testing on these >>>> before committing to openjdk proper. >>>> That could be done by having icedtea7 import them, >>>> and by having Michael or another Sun person run them >>>> through Sun testing. >>>> >>>> There are more changes to fork-exec to come, >>>> although they will probably not affect the average Linux user's >>>> experience. >>>> >>>> Michael and I have been doing other things the past few weeks. >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Sure, we can do some testing with IcedTea7 after the release for M4, >>> which should be sometime in the next week or so. >>> >>> In the meantime, can you or me push the execvpe cleanup to the 6 and 7 >>> forests (tl presumably for 7)? Or is there a further issue there? >>> You've not mentioned it in either reply. >>> >>> Joe, I assume this is okay for 6? Without it the build is broken on >>> newer distributions. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -- >>> Andrew :-) >>> >>> Free Java Software Engineer >>> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) >>> >>> Support Free Java! >>> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK >>> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath >>> http://openjdk.java.net >>> >>> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net) >>> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8 >>> >>> > >
