On 2/20/2011 9:39 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 15 February 2011 20:23, Phil Race<philip.r...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 2/15/2011 6:07 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Yes, IcedTea uses system libraries for everything bar LCMS, where
local changes in OpenJDK mean we are still forced to use the in-tree
version. There hasn't been any success upstreaming these changes,
though I haven't looked at LCMS 2.x.
LittleCMS 1.x didn't provide the support necessary to pass JCK. So we
talked to
the LittleCMS maintainer and he added the necessary APIs in 2.0
JDK 7 has had LittleCMS 2.0 for almost 6 months now and that is included
without any code
modifications, so I think it should now be possible to use a system
library, although
we didn't do the work to actually enable that, so its built into a JDK
library which
has the littlecms code and the glue code. We need to provide the ability
to separate these.
When we pushed LCMS 2.0, I asked for a bug to be filed to remember to do
this work
but I can't find it in the database. I'll ask for that to be filed if it
wasn't already.
NB It didn't seem super-urgent since we pulled in LCMS 2.0 relatively soon
after its release
we thought shipping distros weren't likely to have the library upgrade
anyway, but that's
probably changing.
-phil.
Hi Phil,
Thanks for making me aware of this. I briefly glanced at some for the
release notes for LCMS 2 when it was released, and saw something that
may support the missing functionality, but never had chance to look in
detail. I've also not had chance to look at OpenJDK 7 recently, so
it's great to hear that support has already gone in. Do you have any
idea as to whether this would be safe to backport to OpenJDK 6? I
presume it doesn't alter any public API.
It ought to be OK. If someone else wants to take on the work that is :-)
I've not seen any use of OpenJDK 7 by distros as yet. We've managed
with the other libraries without in-tree support by using local
patching. There's a big libraries patch in IcedTea that would be nice
to integrate but it would need considerable work to do optional system
linking rather than the current brute force of deleting the in-tree
version and always linking. There's also no TCK for 7 yet, which is I
believe what caught many of the issues with missing LCMS support
before.
I don't know how distros would want to present/package the 7 EA builds
so I'm not
too surprised they aren't common.
We believe LCMS 2.0 should pass JCK, but I don't know if a full JCK run
has been performed against a fully open 7 build since it went in.
A 6-open backport would find any problems there.
I did a quick survey of distro support for LCMS 2. It's in Gentoo
(which is what made me aware of it), but Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora all
seem to still be on the 1.x series. So it doesn't seem to be changing
yet. Maybe OpenJDK could be the kick they need to support it? ;-)
yep.
-phil.
