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
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
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
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
Hi folks,
Looks like I generated a bit of discussion here. Let's try to tease apart some
of the issues.
1) I think we need a better articulation of the rule about the boot JDK being
N-1, thus my proposed change to the README. I don't mean to ever prohibit
anybody from ever trying to build
On 2013-06-18 08:57, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
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
Hi Stuart,
I would like people to review the README change as well. Thanks.
I don't think we should simply say
Do not use a build of JDK 8 as the boot JDK for building JDK 8.
as that doesn't explain what the issue is. If I'm building the JDK for
my own use I can use JDK8. So how about:
Hi Erik,
On 18/06/2013 6:06 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2013-06-18 08:57, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
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
On 06/18/2013 10:02 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Stuart,
I would like people to review the README change as well. Thanks.
I don't think we should simply say
Do not use a build of JDK 8 as the boot JDK for building JDK 8.
as that doesn't explain what the issue is. If I'm building the JDK for
Thanks,
I hit another problem after fixing this though. On windows, when
building the sec-bin.zip, the root directory for the zip is
$(JDK_OUTPUTDIR), which at the time contains something around 49k files.
This proves too much for cygwin gnu make to handle and it crashes with a
core dump.
The log level 'trace' is broken on both mac and solaris. When trace is
used, the shell variable is overridden to do the following:
1. Add -x to echo each line that gets executed. This causes all $(shell)
expressions to be printed in addition to recipes.
2. Add some text explaining if it's a
Changeset: 0d1e8518c722
Author:erikj
Date: 2013-06-18 11:29 +0200
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/rev/0d1e8518c722
8014404: Debug flag not added to jdk native compile when --enable-debug is set
Reviewed-by: tbell
! common/autoconf/generated-configure.sh
!
Greetings,
I have picked up David Holmes' work on the following bug:
8014326 [OSX] All libjvm symbols are exported
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=8014326
https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8014326
Here are the HSX-25 webrev URLs:
OpenJDK:
Greetings,
I have picked up David Holmes' work on the following bug:
8014326 [OSX] All libjvm symbols are exported
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=8014326
https://jbs.oracle.com/bugs/browse/JDK-8014326
Here are the HSX-24 backport webrev URLs:
OpenJDK:
Changeset: 6337f652e71f
Author:katleman
Date: 2013-06-13 09:48 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/rev/6337f652e71f
Added tag jdk8-b94 for changeset 50d2bde060f2
! .hgtags
Changeset: 785d07fe3890
Author:katleman
Date: 2013-06-18 15:32 -0700
URL:
Changeset: b8c5f4b6f0ff
Author:katleman
Date: 2013-06-13 09:48 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jaxp/rev/b8c5f4b6f0ff
Added tag jdk8-b94 for changeset c84658e1740d
! .hgtags
Changeset: 992b39afdcb9
Author:katleman
Date: 2013-06-13 09:48 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jdk/rev/992b39afdcb9
Added tag jdk8-b94 for changeset 51479fa56b7c
! .hgtags
Changeset: e7ece2dbdc70
Author:sla
Date: 2013-06-10 11:33 +0200
URL:
Changeset: 3a353050e85a
Author:katleman
Date: 2013-06-13 09:48 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/hotspot/rev/3a353050e85a
Added tag jdk8-b94 for changeset 1beed1f6f9ed
! .hgtags
Changeset: d0add7016434
Author:amurillo
Date: 2013-06-07 09:33 -0700
URL:
Changeset: 4cb113623127
Author:katleman
Date: 2013-06-13 09:49 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/langtools/rev/4cb113623127
Added tag jdk8-b94 for changeset 48c6e6ab7c81
! .hgtags
On 6/18/13 2:25 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 18/06/2013 08:42, Stuart Marks wrote:
4) Could jaxp, jaxws, and corba be built with the current JDK, not the boot
JDK? Sure, probably.[...]
My understanding is that the new build is just following the old build[...]
As least for the jaxws
Thanks for picking this up Dan (and hs25)
Given this was my suggested fix I guess you are actually the one that
needs to review it :)
For completeness I'll add that the linker complains about non-existent
symbols on OSX hence the deletion of a number of entries. The linux and
solaris
On 6/18/13 8:11 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Thanks for picking this up Dan (and hs25)
You're welcome!
Given this was my suggested fix I guess you are actually the one that
needs to review it :)
You are quite correct that I should have made this point clear.
I'm planning to list you as author
22 matches
Mail list logo
