Pete,
1. Do hg diff in your workspace, save the patch somewhere
2. Do hg fclone http://
Hi David, It might help to know that I had pulled the code back in
September or so, made several changes, and then got diverted onto
another project for a while. So now I'm trying to get back in sync with
the
On 31/01/2012 2:50 PM, Pete Brunet wrote:
Hi David, It might help to know that I had pulled the code back in
September or so, made several changes, and then got diverted onto
another project for a while. So now I'm trying to get back in sync with
the latest code. The first thing I did was updat
Hi David, It might help to know that I had pulled the code back in
September or so, made several changes, and then got diverted onto
another project for a while. So now I'm trying to get back in sync with
the latest code. The first thing I did was update my patch with hg
qrefresh and then from cy
Pete,
On 31/01/2012 12:45 PM, Pete Brunet wrote:
I just did the following:
sh ./get_source.sh
and got this:
# cd ./jdk&& hg pull -u
pulling from http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8//jdk
searching for changes
adding changesets
adding manifests
adding file changes
added 563 changesets with 312
On 31/01/2012 12:36 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
* David Holmes [2012-01-30 19:57]:
While gcc compilation on sparc is rare I'm not sure that simply
deleting the sparc-only option unconditionally is the right thing to
do.
I thought about that too. But I was unable to find info on OpenJDK +
SPARC +
I just did the following:
sh ./get_source.sh
and got this:
# cd ./jdk && hg pull -u
pulling from http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8//jdk
searching for changes
adding changesets
adding manifests
adding file changes
added 563 changesets with 3123 changes to 2661 files (+1 heads)
not updating: cro
This change looks fine to me.
It would be ok with me for this change to be pushed into the jdk8/build forest.
Once there, I can do a JPRT run to verify it, but I really don't seen any issue
here.
-kto
On Jan 30, 2012, at 4:57 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Deepak,
>
> The primary change here is
On Jan 30, 2012, at 9:41 AM, Robert Ottenhag wrote:
> Inline,
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Kelly O'Hair
>> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:27 PM
>> To: Robert Ottenhag
>> Cc: Dmitry Samersoff; serviceability-...@openjdk.java.net; John Coomes;
>> build-dev@openjdk.java.net
>> Subject
On 31/01/2012 11:12 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
On 01/30/2012 04:50 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 31/01/2012 1:08 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
The following webrev is a patch from Miran Kos and Martin Grebac (cc'ed)
to remove the JAX-WS dependency on apt and the com.sun.mirror API:
http://cr.openjdk.java.ne
On 01/30/2012 04:50 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 31/01/2012 1:08 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
The following webrev is a patch from Miran Kos and Martin Grebac (cc'ed)
to remove the JAX-WS dependency on apt and the com.sun.mirror API:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/7140918/webrev/
This is needed b
Hi Deepak,
The primary change here is a build change so I've cc'ed build-dev.
The majority of the changes are to JVMTI demo files hence I've cc'd
serviceability-dev.
I think JDK8-dev doesn't need to be included now so I've bcc'd it.
While gcc compilation on sparc is rare I'm not sure that si
On 31/01/2012 1:08 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
The following webrev is a patch from Miran Kos and Martin Grebac (cc'ed)
to remove the JAX-WS dependency on apt and the com.sun.mirror API:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/7140918/webrev/
This is needed before Joe Darcy can wield his machete.
Pleas
On 01/30/2012 03:41 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I also think that extremely low or no risk changes need not follow this rule,
but the problem is getting people
to agree with 'no risk changes' are. I've seen enough 'low risk' changes bring
the house down that I'm on the
paranoid side. :^(
How does
On Jan 30, 2012, at 10:02 AM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> On 01/30/2012 09:41 AM, Robert Ottenhag wrote:
>>> > A push to a shared repo without verifying it builds on all supported
>>> > platforms is risky behavior, and one that can
>>> > consume needless resources finding out it doesn't build, a
On 01/30/2012 09:41 AM, Robert Ottenhag wrote:
> A push to a shared repo without verifying it builds on all supported
> platforms is risky behavior, and one that can
> consume needless resources finding out it doesn't build, and more
> importantly waste your co-worker's time undoing it.
> We
Inline,
> -Original Message-
> From: Kelly O'Hair
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 6:27 PM
> To: Robert Ottenhag
> Cc: Dmitry Samersoff; serviceability-...@openjdk.java.net; John Coomes;
> build-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR: 7133124 Remove redundant packages from JAR command lin
Diverged and in transit to another planet. :^(
A push to a shared repo without verifying it builds on all supported platforms
is risky behavior, and one that can
consume needless resources finding out it doesn't build, and more importantly
waste your co-worker's time undoing it.
We have the abil
On 01/30/2012 07:08 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
The following webrev is a patch from Miran Kos and Martin Grebac
(cc'ed) to remove the JAX-WS dependency on apt and the com.sun.mirror
API:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/7140918/webrev/
This is needed before Joe Darcy can wield his machete.
P
The following webrev is a patch from Miran Kos and Martin Grebac (cc'ed)
to remove the JAX-WS dependency on apt and the com.sun.mirror API:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/7140918/webrev/
This is needed before Joe Darcy can wield his machete.
Please cc'ed Miran and Martin on my review comm
Dmitry,
I think this discussion diverged somewhat from the original topic, but I
do agree with you that we must also attack the problem on a process level.
With the model you propose (and also the existing model) I would also
like to stress the need for continuous and automatic builds trigger
John,
Actually the goal of my letter is not to promote new integration scheme.
Just to remind that we need to put some efforts to internal process
review and optimization.
But, see answers below (inline):
Integration method I mentioned often used in open source projects,
because it doesn't r
21 matches
Mail list logo
