I've run the patch through jprt and it builds fine (in default mode) on
closed builds
on all OS versions we build on .. so looks good.
-phil.
On 4/28/2014 8:27 AM, Omair Majid wrote:
Hi Phil,
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-03-19 12:41]:
On 3/17/2014 4:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-04-29 14:56]:
I've run the patch through jprt and it builds fine (in default mode)
on closed builds
on all OS versions we build on .. so looks good.
Thank you for testing this out, Phil. I take it I can go ahead and push
this patch now?
Thanks,
Omair
Hi Phil,
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-03-19 12:41]:
On 3/17/2014 4:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
I don't think JPRT runs any relevant tests. As someone else just found
out yesterday relying on it to test client code will bite you.
However I really meant that we need to make
- Original Message -
On 2014-03-22 20:11, Omair Majid wrote:
Thanks. I wasn't sure how an empty value might be processed.
Make can't really see the difference between an unassigned variable and
one assigned to nothing. (Or, it can, but it's more tricky to check). In
all the
On 2014-03-22 20:11, Omair Majid wrote:
Thanks. I wasn't sure how an empty value might be processed.
Make can't really see the difference between an unassigned variable and
one assigned to nothing. (Or, it can, but it's more tricky to check). In
all the SetupFoo macros, assigning an empty
* Magnus Ihse Bursie magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com [2014-03-21 20:04]:
On 2014-03-21 18:27, Omair Majid wrote:
* Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-03-21 13:25]:
Why the huge duplication in make/lib/Awt2dLibraries.gmk?
I couldn't find a way to make an argument conditional (the
- Original Message -
Hi,
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-03-19 12:39]:
On 3/17/2014 4:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
While we generally support moving files to a proper location, if
this move is causing trouble for Phil and the 2d team, we think it
can be an
* Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-03-21 13:25]:
Why the huge duplication in make/lib/Awt2dLibraries.gmk?
I couldn't find a way to make an argument conditional (the
'INCLUDE_FILES := LCMS.c,' bit) inside the $(call ...) block.
Thanks,
Omair
--
PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
On 2014-03-21 18:27, Omair Majid wrote:
* Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-03-21 13:25]:
Why the huge duplication in make/lib/Awt2dLibraries.gmk?
I couldn't find a way to make an argument conditional (the
'INCLUDE_FILES := LCMS.c,' bit) inside the $(call ...) block.
The typical way
On 3/17/2014 4:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
While we generally support moving files to a proper location, if this
move is causing trouble for Phil and the 2d team, we think it can be
an acceptable exception this time to just single out the LCMS.c file.
(This can be achieved by setting
Hi,
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-03-19 12:39]:
On 3/17/2014 4:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
While we generally support moving files to a proper location, if
this move is causing trouble for Phil and the 2d team, we think it
can be an acceptable exception this time to just
On 2014-03-01 00:24, Omair Majid wrote:
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-02-28 16:46]:
The moving of most of these files will cause me some significant pain.
Oh. Sorry :(
Is there anything I (or possibly the jigsaw folks) can do to minimize
it?
I am not convinced why its necessary.
* Omair Majid oma...@redhat.com [2014-02-20 17:43]:
The following is a preliminary webrev that allows OpenJDK to build and
run against a system-installed copy of lcms2 rather than the copy
bundled with OpenJDK:
root: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/system-lcms/00/
jdk:
The moving of most of these files will cause me some significant pain.
I am not convinced why its necessary. And if done wrong we lose the
history. Even if done *right* the history is harder to get at.
Plus the jigsaw people are very likely to move this code *again*.
I need to look at this more,
* Phil Race philip.r...@oracle.com [2014-02-28 16:46]:
The moving of most of these files will cause me some significant pain.
Oh. Sorry :(
Is there anything I (or possibly the jigsaw folks) can do to minimize
it?
I am not convinced why its necessary.
Basically, there is one file there
* Omair Majid oma...@redhat.com [2014-02-21 10:50]:
* Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-02-21 10:36]:
I think the j2 convention is reasonable.
This is where we disagree. I may have agreed if this was new, but we've been
using libjavalcms.so for the lifetime of 7 and I see no
On 2014-02-20 23:40, Omair Majid wrote:
Hi,
The following is a preliminary webrev that allows OpenJDK to build and
run against a system-installed copy of lcms2 rather than the copy
bundled with OpenJDK:
root: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/system-lcms/00/
jdk:
* Magnus Ihse Bursie magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com [2014-02-21 08:21]:
On 2014-02-20 23:40, Omair Majid wrote:
1. The sources for the bundled library are contained next to
OpenJDK-specific sources. This is not true for the bundled copies of
zlib, libpng and giflib. On the other hand, the jpeg
* Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-02-21 10:36]:
I think the j2 convention is reasonable.
This is where we disagree. I may have agreed if this was new, but we've been
using libjavalcms.so for the lifetime of 7 and I see no reason to change this.
Also, j2 seems pretty meaningless.
- Original Message -
On 2014-02-20 23:40, Omair Majid wrote:
Hi,
The following is a preliminary webrev that allows OpenJDK to build and
run against a system-installed copy of lcms2 rather than the copy
bundled with OpenJDK:
root:
Hi,
The following is a preliminary webrev that allows OpenJDK to build and
run against a system-installed copy of lcms2 rather than the copy
bundled with OpenJDK:
root: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/system-lcms/00/
jdk: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/system-lcms/00-jdk/
21 matches
Mail list logo
