Imo, it's very unlikely that 64-bit build footprint will ever be an
issue, and
32-bit build footprint would be an issue on memory-limited devices, of
which there are none that run OSX. The real utility of 32-bit is
compatibility.
I'd just go with universal binaries and not bother with 32/64 options.
I don't speak for Oracle, of course. Personal opinion only. :)
Paul
On 2/27/12 6:13 PM, John Yeary wrote:
Personally I like the idea of a default with "Universal" binaries, and the
options for 32/64 for the reasons you mentioned. I think it is important to be inclusive
vs. exclusive.
John
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 27, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Artem Ananiev<[email protected]> wrote:
Alternatively, we can completely ignore ARCH_DATA_MODEL on Mac and always build
universal binaries. As far as I remember, we did exactly this when Mac OS X
Port was a standalone OpenJDK project. Of course, in this case we'll lose an
ability to build 32-bit and 64-bit only builds, which may be useful in cases
when JDK/JRE size is important.
Thanks,
Artem
On 2/22/2012 1:51 AM, Michael McMahon wrote:
Jim,
If the Hotspot openjdk build is changed to produce both 32/64 bit binaries
then the JDK build can be changed to do the same. The only reason why
32 bit support was removed in the JDK libs was because it wasn't
available in Hotspot
at the time. This seemed to align with Oracle's (and Apple's)
views/plans at the time also.
However, it's clear there is a demand for at least the Openjdk source to
be buildable for
32/64 bit. How about if ARCH_DATA_MODEL=universal then we build both on
Mac OS X?
We can do this in jdk7u-dev (post 7u4) and in jdk8. I don't see any need
to get it into
7u4 because Oracle won't be supporting it in our JDK anyway.
- Michael
On 21/02/12 22:45, James Melvin wrote:
One caveat...
For the JVM, we've preserved 32/64-bit universal builds. Currently, the
JVM universal build only includes 64-bit support. Additionally including
32-bit requires 3 Makefile uncomments. However, there may likely be
additional work on the JDK side to fully support the same.
- Jim
On 2/21/12 5:21 PM, Mike Swingler wrote:
On Feb 21, 2012, at 12:18 AM, Henri Gomez wrote:
Another question for you guys about OSX.
32 bits support as been removed some weeks ago without further notice
on OSX version.
* Why such decision ?
* How could we bring back 32 bits support, especially -d32 support ?
* Where is the correct location to enter a bug report on this
(bugreport.sun.com ?)
Dalibor& Mark,
Henri raises some good points here, since the ability to build
OpenJDK 32/64 Universal was lost in the merge from the macosx-port
repository to the jdk7u-osx repository with no public discussion.
I thought the ability to build 32/64 Universal was preserved, and
Oracle was simply going to support 64-bit only in it's proprietary
builds.
What is the best path to fixing this?
Mike Swingler
Apple Inc.
