On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 18:34:06 GMT, John Neffenger <[email protected]> wrote:
>> buildSrc/linux.gradle line 48:
>>
>>> 46: "-Wextra", "-Wall", "-Wformat-security", "-Wno-unused",
>>> "-Wno-parentheses", "-Werror=trampolines"] // warning flags
>>> 47:
>>> 48: if (OS_ARCH == "i386") {
>>
>> Why was this change needed, and is it sufficient? It seems that there is a
>> larger problem (likely out of scope for this fix) as to how `IS_64` is set
>> that might need follow-up.
>
> The change was needed because the `-m32` option is appropriate only for the
> `i386` architecture. I believe the change is sufficient, but there does seem
> to be a problem in how the `IS_64` property is set and used throughout the
> build files. The property is set with:
>
>
> ext.IS_64 = OS_ARCH.toLowerCase().contains("64")
>
>
> Among the Java architecture names known to the build file or supported by
> Debian, that means:
>
> * `IS_64` is true for `amd64`, `aarch64`, `ppc64le`, `loongarch64`, and
> `riscv64`, while
> * `IS_64` is false for `arm`, `i386`, and `s390x`.
>
> The previous code, then, would set the `-m32` option for `arm`, `i386`, and
> `s390x`. Yet the option is valid only for the [following target machines][1]:
>
> * RS/6000 and PowerPC (Debian `powerpc`)
> * SPARC (Debian `sparc`)
> * x86 (Debian `i386`)
>
> So as long as nobody wants to build JavaFX for the 32-bit PowerPC or 32-bit
> SPARC architectures, the code change is fine. I don't know of anyone still
> supporting operating systems with Java on those architectures, so we should
> be safe.
>
> [1]: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Option-Summary.html
OK, thanks for the clarification.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1124#discussion_r1290769319
