Re: Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target
 Aug 31, 2017 le 06:42:28PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg êcrit: > Le 31/08/2017 à 14:20, Chris West a écrit : > > I don't think we should touch the compiler, or the peanut gallery will > scream in horror and complain that Debian's OpenJDK isn't Java. Let's > fix Ant first and see what's left. I think all the remaining problems hit either: * -Dant.build.javac.source: https://bugs.debian.org/873969 , or * https://bugs.debian.org/873977 But, who knows what we'll find with those fixed. > If a package calls javac or javadoc > directly (like junit [1]) a bug > can be raised right now. Done. It was only about 30.
Re: Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target
Le 31/08/2017 à 14:20, Chris West a écrit : > Are we going to fix these all by hand? i.e. shall I raise 90 bugs, > and then start changing packages? Or are we going to fix this in the > compiler? Or does someone have an ant/environent suggestion? I don't think we should touch the compiler, or the peanut gallery will scream in horror and complain that Debian's OpenJDK isn't Java. Let's fix Ant first and see what's left. If a package calls javac or javadoc directly (like junit [1]) a bug can be raised right now. Emmanuel Bourg [1] https://sources.debian.net/src/junit/3.8.2-8/debian/rules/#L24
Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target
The Java 9 games continue! There are around 90 packages which fail today, but which will succeed if the -source and -target flags are fixed. Here are the build logs / package list: https://rbuild.fau.xxx/2017-08-30/regress/ This is after the current round of ant and Maven changes. There's not a super strong correlation in the results. Some will be fixed by asking ant to force the javadoc source option to 1.6, like the javac option. e.g. https://rbuild.fau.xxx/2017-08-30/regress/opticalraytracer.log I did this test with this minimal patch: https://github.com/FauxFaux/debjdk9/blob/6298e520cb315d93d03872aa8e70b7b964f5e1eb/jdk/allow-old-source-versions.diff The System.err logging is lost in most cases, unfortunately; I suspect build systems typically drop it, or javac is being run as part of some abnormal ant build, or... We could... fiddle the version iff we're running inside dpkg-buildpackage, using environment detection again? Pretty ew. Not sure it would work for Ubuntu. Are we going to fix these all by hand? i.e. shall I raise 90 bugs, and then start changing packages? Or are we going to fix this in the compiler? Or does someone have an ant/environent suggestion? Cheers.
