Re: RFR(XS): 8186218 - Make JIB exclude webrev from all sub-repo levels when creating source bundles

On 31/08/2017 11:56 PM, Christian Tornqvist wrote: Please review this change that updates the exclude filter used by JIB when creating source bundles, it’ll now ignore webrev folders and webrev.zip in all repository levels. Won't that added capability be obsolete once we have the

RE: RFR(M): 8186978: Introduce configure argument enable-cds

Hi, thanks for reviewing everybody! Yes, works fine without that assignment. New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr17/8186978-disableCDS/webrev.02/ Could someone please sponsor? I think autogen.sh needs to be run before submitting. Best regards, Goetz. > -Original Message-

Re: RFR(XS): 8186218 - Make JIB exclude webrev from all sub-repo levels when creating source bundles

On 2017-08-31 15:56, Christian Tornqvist wrote: Please review this change that updates the exclude filter used by JIB when creating source bundles, it’ll now ignore webrev folders and webrev.zip in all repository levels. Tested locally using JIB. Webrev:

Re: [RFR]: 8186786: Name collisions with autoconf definitions on alpha and sh

On 08/31/2017 03:44 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: Looks good to me. I'll sponsor the patch for you, and regenerate the generated-configure.sh. Great. Thank you! Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin -

Re: RFR(M): 8186978: Introduce configure argument enable-cds

On 2017-08-31 14:47, David Holmes wrote: Hi Goetz, On 31/08/2017 10:29 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: Hi, Tests for class data sharing (cds) are enabled if @requires vm.cds is true. The property vm.cds depends on the preprocessor macro ENABLE_CDS. ... but you mean INCLUDE_CDS. :-) This

Re: RFR(M): 8186978: Introduce configure argument enable-cds

This looks ok to me, but I would value Magnus' input as well. /Erik On 2017-08-31 14:29, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: Hi, Tests for class data sharing (cds) are enabled if @requires vm.cds is true. The property vm.cds depends on the preprocessor macro ENABLE_CDS. This can not yet be switched by

Re: RFR(M): 8186978: Introduce configure argument enable-cds

Hi Goetz, On 31/08/2017 10:29 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote: Hi, Tests for class data sharing (cds) are enabled if @requires vm.cds is true. The property vm.cds depends on the preprocessor macro ENABLE_CDS. This can not yet be switched by configure. It's only disabled automatically for the

RFR(M): 8186978: Introduce configure argument enable-cds

Hi, Tests for class data sharing (cds) are enabled if @requires vm.cds is true. The property vm.cds depends on the preprocessor macro ENABLE_CDS. This can not yet be switched by configure. It's only disabled automatically for the minimal build. This change introduces enable-cds with default

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

(CC:ing bsd-port-dev, where this conversation should have moved to a while ago ...) On 31.08.2017 10:53, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: There is an active community maintaining OpenJDK on BSD. The problem is just that they are doing it downstream instead of working together with upstream due

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 08/31/2017 09:21 AM, David Holmes wrote: Those were very minor patches of two quite distinct kinds: 1. Make zero work on platform Z This is something we can easily accommodate, and it generally doesn't take much effort or disturb other platforms. Well, Zero is currently not maintained, is

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 31/08/2017 5:40 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:21 AM, David Holmes > wrote: On 31/08/2017 5:08 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: On 08/31/2017 08:58 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: BSD is

Re: CompileJavaModule.gmk overrides values from a custom extension gmk

On 2017-08-30 23:43, David Holmes wrote: On 31/08/2017 12:36 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello Jason, I took the liberty of creating an issue for this: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186983 The mailing list server removes attachments. This makes it difficult for new people to

Re: CompileJavaModule.gmk overrides values from a custom extension gmk

Updated webrev with the below corrected: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8186983/webrev.02/ /Erik On 2017-08-30 16:57, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, On 2017-08-30 16:48, Gary Adams wrote: Is the expectation that all of the := will be changed to += for these variables? 468

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:21 AM, David Holmes wrote: > On 31/08/2017 5:08 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > >> On 08/31/2017 08:58 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> >>> BSD is buildable for jdk9 in the separate, hardly-maintained bsd-port >>> only. :-( >>> >> >>

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 31/08/2017 5:08 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: On 08/31/2017 08:58 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: BSD is buildable for jdk9 in the separate, hardly-maintained bsd-port only. :-( That's what I guess as well after seeing that the "bsd" directories within the "jdk" structure are missing

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 08/31/2017 08:58 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > BSD is buildable for jdk9 in the separate, hardly-maintained bsd-port only. > :-( That's what I guess as well after seeing that the "bsd" directories within the "jdk" structure are missing in the mainline tree. Then I checked what NetBSD is

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 31/08/2017 4:41 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Looking through my Mails quick, all mails at bsd-port-dev seem to refer to jdk8. Yes the port went dormant after 8. toolchain.m4 changed a bit since jdk8. Maybe noone attempted to build jdk10 yet on BSD and Adrian ran into new errors. Did some

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 08/31/2017 08:41 AM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: > Looking through my Mails quick, all mails at bsd-port-dev seem to refer to > jdk8. > > toolchain.m4 changed a bit since jdk8. Maybe noone attempted to build jdk10 > yet on BSD and > Adrian ran into new errors. Well, "bsd" is also missing from

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 2017-08-31 08:25, David Holmes wrote: On 31/08/2017 4:14 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi Adrian, this looks fine. Thanks for taking on BSD (I'm a bit confused though, I thought BSD is already buildable). Thomas you beat me to it - on both counts! I too recall others building for BSD. BSD

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

Looking through my Mails quick, all mails at bsd-port-dev seem to refer to jdk8. toolchain.m4 changed a bit since jdk8. Maybe noone attempted to build jdk10 yet on BSD and Adrian ran into new errors. ..Thomas On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:25 AM, David Holmes wrote: > On

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

On 31/08/2017 4:14 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi Adrian, this looks fine. Thanks for taking on BSD (I'm a bit confused though, I thought BSD is already buildable). Thomas you beat me to it - on both counts! I too recall others building for BSD. David Best Regards, Thomas On Wed, Aug 30,

Re: [RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

Hi Adrian, this looks fine. Thanks for taking on BSD (I'm a bit confused though, I thought BSD is already buildable). Best Regards, Thomas On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:30 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz < glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote: > Hello! > > I started working on fixing OpenJDK on BSD