Another thing to consider is that there may be more "modes" than just
32/64 as time goes on (x32 on Intel springs to mind). Whether that's an
argument for keeping dual mode, or dropping it even faster, I'm not sure.
On 09/06/2013 12:20 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Google is interested in using DUAL_MODE on Linux and would prefer that at
least the code to support DUAL_MODE is not removed. I see that you are not
removing DUAL_MODE, just disabling it for Solaris.
I would prefer to see DUAL_MODE semi-supported with all OSes, and make
support for DUAL_MODE a deployment time decision. If you don't create the
32-bit/64-bit overlays, then the -d32 and -d64 flags simply won't find the
alternate set of binaries. Does anyone else in openjdk-land like the
ability to use -d32 and -d64?
---
I would like to see DUAL_MODE defined as follows, independent of OS:
#if defined(LIBARCH32NAME) && defined(LIBARCH64NAME)
# define DUAL_MODE
#endif
---
I'm unhappy that below you are undefing DUAL_MODE even if a user went out
of their way to define it. You could more simply remove
#define DUAL_MODE
#ifdef __solaris__-# define DUAL_MODE+# ifdef DUAL_MODE+# undef
DUAL_MODE+# endif
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Kumar Srinivasan <
kumar.x.sriniva...@oracle.com> wrote:
Hello,
Please review the changes to remove Solaris 32-bit binaries from JDK8
distros,
at this time the dual mode support in the launcher is being disabled.
Message regarding this:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/**pipermail/jdk8-dev/2013-**
September/003159.html<http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8-dev/2013-September/003159.html>
The jdk changes are here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~**ksrini/8020552/webrev.jdk.0/<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8020552/webrev.jdk.0/>
The top forest changes are here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~**ksrini/8020552/webrev.jdk8.0/<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8020552/webrev.jdk8.0/>
Thanks
Kumar
--
- DML
