Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

- Original Message - > > On Jul 5, 2016, at 1:33 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > >>> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:22 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > >> common/autoconf/flags.m4 > >> 716 $2JVM_CFLAGS="${$2JVM_CFLAGS} ${$2CXXSTD_CXXFLAG}" > >> > >> There is a pre-e

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

> On Jul 5, 2016, at 1:33 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > - Original Message - >>> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:22 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote: >> common/autoconf/flags.m4 >> 716 $2JVM_CFLAGS="${$2JVM_CFLAGS} ${$2CXXSTD_CXXFLAG}" >> >> There is a pre-existing bug in the setup of ${$2CXXSTD_CXXFLA

Re: [9] Fix for JDK-8074824: Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_xawt

It is not always clear to me what warning is being suppressed and why you have chosen a particular solution/action this next one looks like it might introduce an unused variable warning. What was it solving ? That the code was not checking a return value ? size_t bytesWritten = write ( AWT_WRIT

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

- Original Message - > > On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:22 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > >> Hello, > >> > >> In general it looks good. It's nice to see that this also fixes that > >> warning output from configure. My only nit is the comment describing the > >> pa

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:22 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > - Original Message - >> Hello, >> >> In general it looks good. It's nice to see that this also fixes that >> warning output from configure. My only nit is the comment describing the >> parameters for FLAGS_SETUP_GCC6_COMPILER_FLAGS.

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

- Original Message - > Hello, > > In general it looks good. It's nice to see that this also fixes that > warning output from configure. My only nit is the comment describing the > parameters for FLAGS_SETUP_GCC6_COMPILER_FLAGS. It indicates that it > takes named parameters while it actuall

Re: Setting/overriding HOTSPOT_VERSION_STRING

Thanks Volker! I think --with-version-opt is what I need. -Doug > On 05 Jul 2016, at 14:34, Volker Simonis wrote: > > Hi Doug, > > HOTSPOT_VERSION_STRING comes from VERSION_STRING: > > hotspot/make/lib/CompileJvm.gmk: > -DHOTSPOT_VERSION_STRING='"$(VERSION_STRING)" > > and VERSION_STRING co

Re: Setting/overriding HOTSPOT_VERSION_STRING

Hi Doug, HOTSPOT_VERSION_STRING comes from VERSION_STRING: hotspot/make/lib/CompileJvm.gmk: -DHOTSPOT_VERSION_STRING='"$(VERSION_STRING)" and VERSION_STRING comes from configure. In your build directory you can do: grep VERSION_STRING spec.gmk VERSION_STRING := 9-internal+0-2016-06-29-155201.d0

Re: RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

No further comments from me Erik! Looks good. Thanks, David On 5/07/2016 4:44 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8003593/webrev.02/ Only change is the name of the suppress variable. On 2016-07-04 03:02, David Holmes wrote: Fix typo ... On 4/07/20

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

Hello, In general it looks good. It's nice to see that this also fixes that warning output from configure. My only nit is the comment describing the parameters for FLAGS_SETUP_GCC6_COMPILER_FLAGS. It indicates that it takes named parameters while it actually just takes positional. Please eith