On 6/18/13 8:28 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 18/06/2013 4:02 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
The only problem with using N is that you don't know whether you have
broken building with N-1. Therefore the general recommendation for most
people should be to always use N-1. I think Stuart is just searchi
On 18/06/2013 4:02 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
The only problem with using N is that you don't know whether you have
broken building with N-1. Therefore the general recommendation for most
people should be to always use N-1. I think Stuart is just searching
for ways to make people aware that usi
On 6/17/2013 6:22 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
On 06/17/2013 05:21 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 6/17/13 4:02 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Rule #1 Nobody reads the README
Rule #2 When things go wrong, blame the README
I of course have no objection to the change, however, I'm not
convinced it will
he
The only problem with using N is that you don't know whether you have
broken building with N-1. Therefore the general recommendation for most
people should be to always use N-1. I think Stuart is just searching
for ways to make people aware that using N-1 is "the right thing to do".
-- Jon
I thought the only rule was "must be buildable by N-1", not that you
must not try to use N!
Can the problem preventing a build using JDK8 as the boot JDK not be
corrected? I'm assuming it is one of the more unusual parts of the build
where we mess with bootclasspath etc?
David
On 18/06/2013
On 17/06/2013 4:52 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2013-06-17 05:35, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Erik,
In:
CFLAGS_JDK="$CFLAGS_JDK $CFLAGS_DEBUG_SYMBOLS"
why the quoting? And why not use:
CFLAGS_JDK += "$CFLAGS_DEBUG_SYMBOLS"
I wasn't aware that the += operator was valid in shell script, but a bi
On 06/17/2013 05:21 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
On 6/17/13 4:02 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Rule #1 Nobody reads the README
Rule #2 When things go wrong, blame the README
I of course have no objection to the change, however, I'm not
convinced it will
help much the next time someone runs into this. :^
On 6/17/13 4:02 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Rule #1 Nobody reads the README
Rule #2 When things go wrong, blame the README
I of course have no objection to the change, however, I'm not convinced it will
help much the next time someone runs into this. :^(
Hi Kelly! You still read this stuff here? :
I couldn't find a good way to show me rolling my eyes, but I found this:
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/rolling%20eyes%20gif
Rule #1 Nobody reads the README
Rule #2 When things go wrong, blame the README
I of course have no objection to the change, however, I'm not convinced it will
help much th
Hi all,
We had a problem in TL the other day [1] [2] that wasn't caught because a
developer was using a JDK 8 build as his boot JDK. Turns out the rule to use
JDK N-1 as the boot JDK for JDK N isn't specified clearly in
README-builds.html. Here's a diff to strengthen the wording in that file.
On 14/06/2013 17:21, Mike Duigou wrote:
I found -concurrency:auto generated too many jobs on the machines I use.
-concurrency:$(JOBS) is currently always smaller than -concurrency:auto.
$JOBS is currently approximately min(16, min($(CORES),$(MEMORY) / 1100M)))
If we find that $JOBS ends up be
11 matches
Mail list logo
