OK, so I created an issue[1] for follow up for Windows build and reverted the change in flags-cflags.m4, if nothing else, I’ll push without another webrev pinging that I get an +1 from someone in build-de, Erik?
[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8235461 Cheers, Henry > On Dec 5, 2019, at 12:21 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > > On 12/5/19 12:41 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: >> On 05/12/2019 08:16, Henry Jen wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Updated webrev[1] reflect comments since last webrev. Vicente had done all >>> the heavy-lifting and hand over to me to finish up. >>> >>> Changes to symbols is reverted, as we expect that only need to be updated >>> in next release by running make/scripts/generate-symbol-data.sh. >>> >>> The jar files are confusing in the webrev, but those files are removed. The >>> whole test/jdk/tools/pack200 is removed. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Henry >>> >>> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~henryjen/jdk14/8234542/0/webrev/ >>> >> The update webrev looks okay to me, except this part of the comment in >> flags-cflags.m4 >> >> "Now that unpack200 has been removed we should consider setting it for >> windows too. but this could be done as a follow-up effort. It could be that >> other other clients are relying on the current configuration for windows". >> >> I think it would be best to create an infrastructure/build issue and leave >> most of this confusing comment out. >> > > I also think keeping flags-cflags.m4 as is and file a new build issue as a > follow-up would be better. > > Otherwise, this updated webrev looks okay to me. > > Mandy
