Re: A small bug: F# in $PATH

Exactly. Thanks. -Max On 6/5/13 11:22 AM, Tim Bell wrote: Hi Max: I'm trying to build 32-bit openjdk on a Windows machine. My Visual Studio 2010 installation includes F#, That is why the README [1] advises ''Only the C++ part of VS2010 is needed". therefore the PATH variable in spec.gmk h

Re: A small bug: F# in $PATH

Hi Max: I'm trying to build 32-bit openjdk on a Windows machine. My Visual Studio 2010 installation includes F#, That is why the README [1] advises ''Only the C++ part of VS2010 is needed". therefore the PATH variable in spec.gmk has the F#/bin directory at the beginning. It seems all charac

A small bug: F# in $PATH

I'm trying to build 32-bit openjdk on a Windows machine. My Visual Studio 2010 installation includes F#, therefore the PATH variable in spec.gmk has the F#/bin directory at the beginning. It seems all characters after "#" is ignored because the make process complains "chdir: command not found".

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

Thank you for reviewing, Tim. Tao On 6/4/13 5:30 PM, Tim Bell wrote: I am OK with the Makefile changes. Dan - Thanks for looking after the deeper questions. Tim On 06/ 4/13 05:25 PM, Tao Mao wrote: Thank you for your explanation and a "OK", Dan. Tao On 6/4/13 5:21 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

I am OK with the Makefile changes. Dan - Thanks for looking after the deeper questions. Tim On 06/ 4/13 05:25 PM, Tao Mao wrote: Thank you for your explanation and a "OK", Dan. Tao On 6/4/13 5:21 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: OK, based on the largefiles.pdf write-up, your use of _FILE_OFFS

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

No problem. Sorry for the delay in someone from Runtime getting to this review. I _think_ the build-dev guys still trust my ability to review Makefile changes, but after imposing FDS on the world, they may want to see my Makefile changes rot in a dungeon somewhere... :-) Or at least somewhere whe

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

Thank you for your explanation and a "OK", Dan. Tao On 6/4/13 5:21 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: OK, based on the largefiles.pdf write-up, your use of _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 is going to cause ostream.o to bind to various 64-bit versions of some functions. Based on my very hazy memory of my days

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

OK, based on the largefiles.pdf write-up, your use of _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 is going to cause ostream.o to bind to various 64-bit versions of some functions. Based on my very hazy memory of my days in file system code, this binding is going to affect ostream.o only unless ostream.o is writing to so

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

Thank you for review, Dan. I'll try to answer as much as I can. Please see inline. Thanks. Tao On 6/4/13 4:35 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/712/webrev.00/ Tao, I think the lack of response to this review request is the absolutely strange nature of the

hg: jdk8/build: 4 new changesets

Changeset: 78852ce176db Author:jqzuo Date: 2013-05-28 20:03 +0200 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/rev/78852ce176db 8014762: Add JMC configure option mapping to Jprt.gmk Summary: Need to add the mapping between JPRT env var and configure flag for JMC, from ALT_JMC_ZIP_DIR

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tamao/712/webrev.00/ Tao, I think the lack of response to this review request is the absolutely strange nature of these changes. And I thought I put out some weird code reviews... :-) make/linux/makefiles/vm.make Build ostream.o with _FILE_OFFSET_BITS==64 o

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

Thank you for looking at it, Yumin. Please see inline. Tao On 6/4/13 4:14 PM, Yumin Qi wrote: Hi, Tao The change works only when LP64 is not defined as "1", I would think you need to check if it is defined instead. (how about LP64=other?, source code only check if it is defined). Is that

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

Thank you, Thomas. Tao On 6/4/13 4:11 PM, Thomas Schatzl wrote: On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 16:03 -0700, Tao Mao wrote: Since the changeset touched makefiles, I've included build-dev@openjdk.java.net . I need to push the hsx24 bug asap. Please review it. Looks okay to me. Thomas

Re: URGENT: Request for review: 7122222: GC log is limited to 2G for 32-bit

Since the changeset touched makefiles, I've included build-dev@openjdk.java.net . I need to push the hsx24 bug asap. Please review it. Thanks. Tao On 6/4/13 2:37 PM, Tao Mao wrote: Hi all, Need reviews to catch RDP2. The current webrev is a working solution to all platforms, Linux, Windows

Add optional support for using the system libicu

Hi, webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/system-icu/00/ This implements support for linking against the system-installed ICU instead of building and linking against the bundled copy of ICU in OpenJDK8. Now someone building OpenJDK can delete the .../font/layout directory and use con

hg: jdk8/build/jdk: 8015644: makefile changes to allow integration of new features

Changeset: 16003f414ca3 Author:katleman Date: 2013-06-04 14:11 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jdk/rev/16003f414ca3 8015644: makefile changes to allow integration of new features Reviewed-by: tbell, erikj, dholmes Contributed-by: amy.y.w...@oracle.com ! makefiles/I

hg: jdk8/build/nashorn: 44 new changesets

Changeset: 1c7481ac7fe0 Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:58 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/nashorn/rev/1c7481ac7fe0 Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset dee23cce5235 ! .hgtags Changeset: 80d4db063d5a Author:jlaskey Date: 2013-05-14 11:15 -0300 URL:

hg: jdk8/build/jdk: 63 new changesets

Changeset: 3c08c9ebd1fb Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:58 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jdk/rev/3c08c9ebd1fb Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset a2a2a91075ad ! .hgtags Changeset: 93de1ab38793 Author:jchen Date: 2013-05-17 10:04 -0700 URL: http:/

hg: jdk8/build/langtools: 20 new changesets

Changeset: 023e9a614d26 Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:58 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/langtools/rev/023e9a614d26 Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 149890642a0e ! .hgtags Changeset: 0928f2cfbf8e Author:jjg Date: 2013-05-17 13:48 -0700 URL: ht

hg: jdk8/build: 2 new changesets

Changeset: 46be9eb242d1 Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:57 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/rev/46be9eb242d1 Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 3a36c926a7aa ! .hgtags Changeset: 9b8e8098172c Author:katleman Date: 2013-06-04 11:02 -0700 URL: http://

hg: jdk8/build/jaxp: 6 new changesets

Changeset: a6596a06e10b Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:58 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jaxp/rev/a6596a06e10b Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 1ab5d8d6eab8 ! .hgtags Changeset: a7cec93e4682 Author:joehw Date: 2013-05-20 16:11 -0700 URL: http:

hg: jdk8/build/jaxws: Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset a0f604766ca1

Changeset: 7386eca865e1 Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:58 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jaxws/rev/7386eca865e1 Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset a0f604766ca1 ! .hgtags

hg: jdk8/build/corba: Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 717aa26f8e0a

Changeset: 8dc9d7ccbb2d Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:57 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/corba/rev/8dc9d7ccbb2d Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 717aa26f8e0a ! .hgtags

hg: jdk8/build/hotspot: Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 092018493d3b

Changeset: 573d86d412cd Author:katleman Date: 2013-05-30 10:57 -0700 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/hotspot/rev/573d86d412cd Added tag jdk8-b92 for changeset 092018493d3b ! .hgtags

hg: jdk8/build: 2 new changesets

Changeset: 44259699e0b5 Author:erikj Date: 2013-06-04 10:23 +0200 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/rev/44259699e0b5 8015784: Add configure parameter --with-update-version Reviewed-by: tbell, katleman, erikj Contributed-by: tristan@oracle.com ! common/autoconf/generate

Re: Review Request: 8015644 : makefile changes to allow integration of new features

Amy- Looks good to me as well. Tim On 06/ 4/13 12:15 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Looks good. /Erik On 2013-06-04 04:59, Amy Wang wrote: Hi, All, This is the newly updated webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~katleman/8015644/webrev.jdk.02/

Re: old build - has a date been set for its removal?

On 2013-06-04 14:13, Alan Bateman wrote: On 04/06/2013 12:25, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2013-06-04 13:18, Alan Bateman wrote: The new build has been the default for more than 4 months now (since b74 I think). For the period after the switch then we were careful to keep the old build working

Re: RFR: 8010785: JDK 8 build on Linux fails with new build mechanism

On 4/06/2013 9:21 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2013-06-04 06:56, David Holmes wrote: I think we should add a (configure time?) check to watch for the illegal: BUILD_CRYPTO=no, OPENJDK=true. Not sure where that would fit. Configure is only setting BUILD_CRYPTO false in the closed logic, so t

Re: old build - has a date been set for its removal?

On 04/06/2013 12:25, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2013-06-04 13:18, Alan Bateman wrote: The new build has been the default for more than 4 months now (since b74 I think). For the period after the switch then we were careful to keep the old build working but it's a tax and I'm wondering if we are

Re: old build - has a date been set for its removal?

On 2013-06-04 13:18, Alan Bateman wrote: The new build has been the default for more than 4 months now (since b74 I think). For the period after the switch then we were careful to keep the old build working but it's a tax and I'm wondering if we are past that phase now. If we are past that ph

Re: RFR: 8010785: JDK 8 build on Linux fails with new build mechanism

On 2013-06-04 06:56, David Holmes wrote: I think we should add a (configure time?) check to watch for the illegal: BUILD_CRYPTO=no, OPENJDK=true. Not sure where that would fit. Configure is only setting BUILD_CRYPTO false in the closed logic, so this would be to catch someone either sett

old build - has a date been set for its removal?

The new build has been the default for more than 4 months now (since b74 I think). For the period after the switch then we were careful to keep the old build working but it's a tax and I'm wondering if we are past that phase now. If we are past that phase then I wonder if there is a plan to r

Re: RFR: 8010785: JDK 8 build on Linux fails with new build mechanism

New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8010785/webrev.jdk.04/ On 2013-06-04 06:56, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, On 4/06/2013 12:21 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hi David, Thanks for the comments, new webrev for jdk: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8010785/webrev.jdk.03/ Thanks. Minor

Re: Review Request: 8015644 : makefile changes to allow integration of new features

Looks good. /Erik On 2013-06-04 04:59, Amy Wang wrote: Hi, All, This is the newly updated webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~katleman/8015644/webrev.jdk.02/ I removed the space before the ":" in line 627. Thanks, Amy On 6/3/