Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
Forwarded Message
Subject: [RFR] 8217753: Enable HotSpot builds on 5.x Linux kernels
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 07:24:48 +
From: Andrew John Hughes
To: 'jdk8u-...@openjdk.java.net'
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/J
Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
Forwarded Message
Subject: [RFR] 8220397: JDK-8036003 backport regresses no_strip builds
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 07:33:16 +
From: Andrew John Hughes
To: 'jdk8u-...@openjdk.java.net'
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/
On 14/03/2019 15:32, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Looks good.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2019-03-13 17:27, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
>>
>> Forwarded Message
>> Subject: [RFR] 8220397: JDK-8036003 backport reg
On 14/03/2019 15:31, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Looks good to me.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2019-03-13 17:27, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
>>
>> Forwarded Message
>> Subject: [RFR] 8217753: Enable HotSpot build
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193764
Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8193764/webrev.01/
This one applies pretty much as-is, when adjustments are made to use the
jdk-options.m4 file rather than jdk-version.m4, which doesn't exist in
8u. generated-configure.sh i
On 19/03/2019 15:09, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Probably it's because glibc deprecated readdir, and we don't have
> --disable-warnings-as-errors by default?
>
> (I think warnings should not be errors except as opt-in by openjdk
> developers/maintainers)
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 7:47 AM Andrew Ha
On 19/03/2019 15:09, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Probably it's because glibc deprecated readdir, and we don't have
> --disable-warnings-as-errors by default?
>
> (I think warnings should not be errors except as opt-in by openjdk
> developers/maintainers)
I agree, and we've implemented it that way do
On 21/03/2019 15:49, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> I don't think anyone has tried. Just removing the check in configure
> should be simple enough, but I suspect there will be lots of follow-on
> issues.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2019-03-21 03:05, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the Mac experts will probabl
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8189761
Webrev(s):
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/hotspot/
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/jdk/
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/root/
This backport is largely clean, bar fuzzing, for the J
On 26/03/2019 21:57, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> thanks for doing this backport. I agree, Severin's finding needs to be added
> to hotspot's Unix/Posix vm.make files.
Yes, it was missed because it's already there prior to this patch in the
9 and up HotSpot build which is quite diff
On 28/03/2019 08:51, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-03-28 at 03:56 +0000, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> On 26/03/2019 21:57, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> thanks for doing this backport. I agree, Severin's finding needs to be
On 28/03/2019 09:30, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> Revised HotSpot webrev:
>>>
>>> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/hotspot.02
>>
>> +++ new/src/share/vm/runtime/vm_version.cpp 2019-03-28
>> 03:52:51.384737947 +
>> @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@
>>
>> const char* Abstract_
On 29/03/2019 10:51, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Looks good to me now 😊
>
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew John Hughes
>> Sent: Freitag, 29. März 2019 07:18
>> To: Langer, Christoph ; Severin Gehwolf
>> ; 'jdk8u-...@openjdk.java
Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8223219/webrev.01/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223219
There's quite a long story to this one, more detail of which is in the
bug report. In short, JDK-8199552 was backported as part of a CPU with
no review and so little explan
On 12/06/2019 20:34, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8223219/webrev.01/
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223219
>
> There's quite a long story to this one, more detail of which is in the
> bug report. In sh
On 24/06/2019 14:48, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I please get reviews for this 8u only change? The JDK 8u build
> logic for launcher files includes linker version script files (a.k.a
> mapfiles). The script file for x86 (32bit) marks symbol _IO_stdin_used
> as local. When the symbol
On 24/06/2019 14:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Severin Gehwolf:
>
>> Could I please get reviews for this 8u only change? The JDK 8u build
>> logic for launcher files includes linker version script files (a.k.a
>> mapfiles). The script file for x86 (32bit) marks symbol _IO_stdin_used
>> as local
On 24/06/2019 15:52, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andrew John Hughes:
>
>> On 24/06/2019 14:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * Severin Gehwolf:
>>>
>>>> Could I please get reviews for this 8u only change? The JDK 8u build
>>>> logic for laun
On 25/06/2019 10:04, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could somebody please review this 8u backport? The build system in 8 is
> different, especially hotspot makefiles. Note, libjsig.so is part of
> the hotspot build. The patch is different in 8 (over 11) due to this
> reason. This is a Linux-o
On 26/06/2019 14:02, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 13:04 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 25/06/2019 10:04, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Could somebody please review this 8u backport? The build system in 8 is
>>
On 22/05/2019 17:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I please get reviews for this minimal implementation of a tier1-
> like test set for JDK 8u? The implementation is rather barebones as I
> don't think it's worth rewriting the build system just for a command
> that runs a certain set o
On 28/06/2019 10:52, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Thu, 2019-06-27 at 17:36 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 22/05/2019 17:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Could I please get reviews for this minimal implementati
On 10/07/2019 10:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 09:08 +, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>> Hi Severin,
>>
>> You made a little mistake. It must be "-xO4" instead of "-x04" in the
>> Solaris build file (It's the letter O instead of the number 0) 😉
>
> Sigh. T
On 25/07/2019 16:02, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
snip...
>>
>> Done now. I've added fix-request comments/labels to the above bugs and
>> rebased on top of them. New jdk changeset:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8222737/04/jdk/webrev/
>>
>> Test groups definition is the JDK 9 set p
On 26/07/2019 16:53, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Fri, 2019-07-26 at 14:46 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> On 25/07/2019 16:02, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>
>> snip...
>>
>>>> Done now. I've added fix-request comments/labels to t
On 29/07/2019 11:10, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-07-29 at 10:19 +0100, Andrew Dinn wrote:
>> On 26/07/2019 18:32, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> On 26/07/2019 16:53, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> What exactly is being push
On 30/07/2019 09:48, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> On 29/07/2019 19:30, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> On 7/29/19 7:37 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> So, in light of the changed build system in JDK 9+, and the rather
>>> small changes in this patch (on the grand scheme of things), it seems
>>> reasonable to imp
This is the first of a series of four changes to support -Wreturn-type
in OpenJDK 8u. The -Wreturn-type warning catches instances where control
flow exits a non-void function without returning a value. This can
combine with compiler optimisations in some cases to cause runtime
crashes. The warning
On 27/09/2019 16:48, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I please get a review of this 8u build change backport which adds
> --with-extra-asflags to OpenJDK 8u. At Red Hat, we need to pass certain
> assembler only flags for some builds. For example "-Wa,--generate-
> missing-build-notes=yes"
On 13/02/2020 11:48, Baesken, Matthias wrote:
> Ping - any reviews ?
>
> Thanks, Matthias
>
> From: Baesken, Matthias
> Sent: Dienstag, 11. Februar 2020 10:24
> To: jdk-updates-...@openjdk.java.net; 'build-dev@openjdk.java.net'
>
> Subject: RFR [jdk11]: 8234525: enable link-time section-gc f
On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:32:54 GMT, Kiran Sidhartha Ravikumar
wrote:
>> Looks good. I think we should release-note the removal of the
>> "US/Pacific-New" Link on the off chance that some
>> production/testing system is looking for such a zone.
>
> Thanks for the review everyone, I have added a re
The latest GCC fails if -fcf-protection is used with an x86 (32-bit) target
that doesn't support CMOV:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blobdiff;f=gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c;h=a70f6edf7b0bfa6994db372c2507dbacb5526646;hp=6819a04238965f0ad63b10323823caa2fb8b147c;hb=77d372abec0fbf2cfe922e314
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 04:29:52 GMT, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> The latest GCC fails if -fcf-protection is used with an x86 (32-bit) target
> that doesn't support CMOV:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blobdiff;f=gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c;h=a70f6edf7b0bfa6994db372
On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 16:43:26 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Please review this tiny patch which removes the special casing of
> `--with-native-debug-symbols=external` for the static libs build. I don't see
> why this is needed. If no debug symbols are wanted
> `--with-native-debug-symb
On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 14:31:19 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Currently, the build system defaults the libjvm.so location to "server".
>> This makes looking for `libjvm.so` awkward, see JDK-8273487 for example. We
>> need to see if moving the libjvm.so to a proper location breaks anything.
>>
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:56:22 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> From a build perspective this partially reverts
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8249821 except that it keeps
>> the harfbuzz sources separate and still supports building and running
>> against a system harfbuzz which is only of
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:56:22 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> From a build perspective this partially reverts
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8249821 except that it keeps
>> the harfbuzz sources separate and still supports building and running
>> against a system harfbuzz which is only of
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 17:04:08 GMT, Jiřà Vaněk wrote:
> The run targets of makefile to run J2DBench.jar/J2DAnalyzer.jar were
> lacking the dist directory. This patch is fixing it. Note, that
> build.xml have correct paths
I've filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275872 and am happy to
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:25:35 GMT, Jiřà Vaněk wrote:
>> The run targets of makefile to run J2DBench.jar/J2DAnalyzer.jar were
>> lacking the dist directory. This patch is fixing it. Note, that
>> build.xml have correct paths
>
> Jiřà Vaněk has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previo
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 11:54:39 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> [JDK-8182285](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182285) added the
> incremental build capabilities for modules, by hashing the APIs of each
> module.
>
> The original change uses MD5, which is quite weak, and
> [JDK-8214483](h
On Thursday 16 August 2007 20:56, Ted Neward wrote:
> I don’t think anybody disagrees, in principle, with what you’re saying; in
> reality, though, that’s just adding one more thing to the long list of
> TODOs that the build team have in front of them, and I wouldn’t hold my
> breath waiting for
On 30/11/2007, Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Build 24 and the Mercurial Transition Status:
>
>* We are finishing up our Mercurial dryrun this week.
> In the next few days, all the repositories at
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/
> will be re-initialized, making them unrel
On 25/01/2008, John Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 25, 2008, at 2:20 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>
> > I've also noticed that there are no updates in the Mercurial
> > repositories since the inital b24 upload. Is this because of the
> > distributed nature of mercurial and the fact that ever
On 09/02/2008, Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> FYI...
>
> I started a wiki page for OpenJDK Build issues at:
>
> http://wikis.sun.com/display/OpenJdkBuilds/Home
>
> It should be setup for anyone to add pages or edit them.
>
> -kto
>
I notice that the content of this page at the mom
On 19/03/2008, Ted Neward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As near as I can tell, I'm pulling from the master repositories--I used the
> URL you offer below plus the "subproject" URLs; are you saying that there's
> a better place to pull corba, langtools, jaxp, ... ? My understanding is
> that each
munity. The seven
> > Finalists, in order of receipt of their proposals, are:
> >
> >
> > Closures for JavaNeal Gafter
> >
> > Implement XRender pipeline for Java2D Clemens Eisserer
> >
> > Provide date and time library from JSR-310
va, .NET, XML Services
> Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
> http://www.tedneward.com
>
>
> > -Original Message-
>
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Andrew John Hughes
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008
On 31/03/2008, Volker Simonis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Clemens,
>
> I recently successfully built the whole OpenJDK using gcc 3.3.3 on
> Suse Enterprise Linux 9.3 (see
>
> http://weblogs.java.net/blog/simonis/archive/2008/01/hotspot_develop.html#Build).
> I had no linking problems. Curr
2008/5/12 Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> > We already use 'make -j' when building the .o files, and the dependencies
> > should be ok for the .o files. So for native compilations I don't
> > think we have a problem.
>
> That's interesting; it certainly didn't used to
2008/5/23 Ted Neward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Now check out
> http://blogs.tedneward.com/2007/12/15/Let+The+JDK+Hacking+Begin.aspx (sorry
> I didn't see your email sooner, but I've been AFK for a while), and tell me
> if I left anything out of the process.
>
Hmmm... your blog doesn't seem to all
> BTW does anybody know where to get a SHCK? (/bin/sh
> Compatibility Kit) How can we be sure any /bin/sh interpreter is actually
> compatible with /bin/sh ??
>
> - David Herron
>
>
>
>
I hear the license terms mean people can't
really talk about the SHCK...
--
Andrew :-)
Support Free Java
2008/6/3 Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> As far as I know, only Ubuntu (and only 8.04?) depends on bash.
> No other OS seems to have a problem using plain old antique sh.
>
> ---
>
> Ideally, these sh scripts used in the build process should be changed
> to be something else, maybe small Java a
> GCC will NOT work under Solaris/SPARC, and I'm pretty darned sure it won't
> work under Solaris/x86 or Solaris/x64. There are some significant GCC-isms
> which the JDK does not currently support.
>
> That said, it would not be terribly difficult to modify the source to get
> GCC to work, but yo
efiles,
> happened with gcc4, and will happen with SS12 and VS2008.
>
While I can understand some changes being necessary for major releases
(e.g. the move from GCC 3 to 4),
every single release shouldn't need work; this suggest an issue with
the build system itself.
> -kto
>
>
2008/6/5 Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> 2008/6/4 Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean by the Sun Studio trap.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm referring
On 19/06/2008, Tim Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Reinhold wrote:
>
> > Andrew: Thanks for the patch!
> >
> > The CORBA code isn't maintained directly in OpenJDK, but rather in a
> > sub-project of GlassFish
> (https://glassfish-corba.dev.java.net/).
> >
> > That's why there's no CORBA Grou
On 20/06/2008, David Holmes - Sun Microsystems <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do we need to be careful about the word "recommended" here? There is a big
> difference between "compiles fine" and "works fine". Anyone using alternate
> compilers to build the JDK (Hotspot in particular) may encounter com
>
> > The reality is that people aren't going to download and build a
> > specific copy of GCC just for OpenJDK, and distros will certainly want
> > it to build with the GCC they use for everything else.
> >
>
> But are the Distros expecting/assuming that everything will work fine with
> their ver
2008/6/23 Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 11:43 -0700, David Herron wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>> In my JavaOne talk Sandeep and I had worked up a hack with the same
>>> purpose. He's been busy enough that he hadn't
2008/6/24 Joseph D. Darcy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Yes, since b07 back in March, *no* binary plugs are required to build the
> OpenJDK 6 sources from Sun. The only remaining plug is for SNMP support,
> which is not required functionality according to the platform spec and is
> thus not tested by the
On 24/06/2008, David Herron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>
> > 2008/6/23 Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >
> > > Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > OT, but the mention of binary plugs in t
On 24/06/2008, Andrew John Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/24 Joseph D. Darcy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Yes, since b07 back in March, *no* binary plugs are required to build the
> > OpenJDK 6 sources from Sun. The only remaining plug is for SNMP suppo
On 25/06/2008, Dmitri Trembovetski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
snip..
> > anybody ever tried it on windows. In theory with cygwin you should be
> > able to get enough of the gnu toolchain to get it working. But icedtea
> >
>
> Theories seldom work well when applied to Windows, unfortunately
This does seem to happen with JAVAC. At least, I've had build
failures though Gentoo setting JAVAC. The CORBA and JDK builds then
use this variable which will never work because not only is the
compiler binary name replaced, but options such as the bootclasspath
are lost too. This is why IcedTea
On 22/07/2008, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> >
> >
> > Jeffrey Baker wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Jeffrey Baker wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>
> Second problem: the build dumped core in test_
2008/7/30 Martin Buchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I installed the Linux JREs for 6u10 b28,
> (using java -jar jre..jar)
> and was surprised to discover none of the
> programs (like "bin/java") were executable.
> I checked earlier 6u10 builds,
> and they have the same problem.
> I suspect the jdk
On 25/08/2008, Andrew John Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IcedTea b33 appears to fix the CORBA issue I found with b32, so I've
> moved straight to working on that rather than b32. However, there are
> again a number of issues building this in IcedTea and I haven'
2008/8/26 Mark Wielaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 00:46 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> > I'm currently stuck on this strange issue whereby
>> > sun_java2d_opengl_OGLContext_OGLContextCaps.h is not being generated.
>&
2008/6/19 Ken Cavanaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Mark Reinhold wrote:
>>
>> Andrew: Thanks for the patch!
>>
>> The CORBA code isn't maintained directly in OpenJDK, but rather in a
>> sub-project of GlassFish (https://glassfish-corba.dev.java.net/).
>>
>> That's why there's no CORBA Group. (The same
2008/10/22 Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I filed a jdk7 version of the bug
> http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6672710
> Assigned it to me, but I'm not sure when I get it fixed.
>
> I seem to recall that this wasn't the only thing needing fixing
> so that the openjdk7 builds would buil
2008/10/22 Christian Thalinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 11:43 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> The main show stopper would be sound support, unless
>> Gervill has now been integrated into OpenJDK7. Otherwise,
>> the jsoundhs plug is needed
2008/10/22 Christian Thalinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 11:54 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> Then why aren't you using IcedTea?
>
> Fair question. As I wrote in my blog[1], I have problems in building a
> 64-bit version on OpenSolaris, but
2008/10/22 Christian Thalinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 12:08 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> Is that error from building the hotspot-tools jar? If so, you
>> probably need to add some additional packages to the list
>> in Makefile.am.
>
>
2008/10/23 Daniel Fuchs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi guys,
>
> I could take care of applying the same patch than what I did
> a few months ago for OpenJDK 6.
>
> Namely, if you compile OpenJDK with the binary plugs, the SNMP
> runtime will be compiled and included in rt.jar. If you compile
> without t
ar does not normally live in the jre (jre/lib/tools.jar)
> but above that at lib/tools.jar.
>
> There is something very strange going on here.
>
> -kto
>
> Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 2008-10-22 at 12:16 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>
>&g
On 21/11/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to build the open JDK from source (using the b39 snapshot
> release) on Ubuntu 8.10, but I get the following error message:
>
> In file included from ../generated/incls/_precompiled.incl:286:
>
> /home1/niwi/record
2008/11/21 Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You can ignore the 3 WARNINGS, they will be removed soon.
>
I have to admit I've never seen those warnings. I'm sure I don't need
to say I'm not running a 2.4 copy of Linux.
> However, I'm 99.9% sure that these error messages should not be seen
> at
"FREETYPE2_HEADERS=$(FREETYPE2_CFLAGS)" \
"FT2_LIB=$(FREETYPE2_LIBS)" \
"ALT_PARALLEL_COMPILE_JOBS=$(PARALLEL_JOBS)" \
"HOTSPOT_BUILD_JOBS=$(PARALLEL_JOBS)" \
"JAVAC=" \
"RHINO_JAR=$(RHINO_JAR)&quo
ome1/niwi/record-replay/java/openJava
>
> unset CLASSPATH JAVA_HOME
>
> export ALT_MOZILLA_HEADERS_PATH=$(pwd)/share/plugin
> export ALT_BOOTDIR=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun
>
> make sanity #Note: The sanity check passes even if ALT_BOOTDIR is unset
> make &> make.outp
-jrl-06_nov_2008.jar
> >
> > cd /home1/niwi/record-replay/java/openJava
> >
> > unset CLASSPATH JAVA_HOME
> >
> > export ALT_MOZILLA_HEADERS_PATH=$(pwd)/share/plugin
> > export ALT_BOOTDIR=/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun
> >
> > make sanity #Note: The sanity c
2008/11/26 Kelly O'Hair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If you set the variable WARNINGS_ARE_ERRORS to be empty, it should
> be sent through to all the makefiles. It's the variable
> WARNINGS_ARE_ERRORS that contains the option "-Werror" for hotspot
> compiles, and it is -Werror that makes warnings fatal.
>
2008/12/19 Martin Buchholz :
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 01:57, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> Are there any "official" GPL binaries for OpenJDK these days?
>
> No, but I encourage Sun and encourage others to encourage Sun
> to provide those, at least for Linux where there is a community that cares.
>
No,
2008/12/19 Christian Thalinger :
> On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 12:25 +0100, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>> On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 16:42 +0200, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > I could take care of applying the same patch than what I did
>> > a few months ago for OpenJDK 6.
>> >
>> > Namely, if y
2008/12/19 Mark Wielaard :
> Hi Kelly,
>
> On Fri, 2008-12-19 at 11:39 -0800, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>> These are not official product binaries but early access binary
>> snapshots, you can't expect these binaries to be perfect by any
>> means. They are also not OpenJDK7 builds but JDK7 builds.
>
> Wh
2008/12/19 Mark Wielaard :
> Hi David,
>
> On Fri, 2008-12-19 at 13:46 -0800, David Herron @ Sun wrote:
>> Further when we say OpenJDK7 gets a lot of testing, the testing occurs
>> on JDK7 binary bundles. We don't explicitly test OpenJDK7 but rely on
>> the extreme similarity of the two to assure
2008/12/22 Dmitri Trembovetski :
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dmitri,
>>
>> On Fri, 2008-12-19 at 17:00 -0800, Dmitri Trembovetski wrote:
>>>
>>> Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Fri, 2008-12-19 at 14:21 -0800, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>
> The JDK7 early access binary snapsho
2009/1/16 Jesse Glick :
> Ubuntu 8.10, all updates incl. libc6-dev "2.8~20080505-0ubuntu7". Just
> fetched latest sources from http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/ forest.
>
> g++ -DLINUX -D_GNU_SOURCE -DIA32 -DPRODUCT -I. -I../generated/adfiles
> -I../generated/jvmtifiles -I/space/src/jdk7/hotspo
2009/3/4 Martin Buchholz :
> The jdk7 builds at
> http://download.java.net/jdk7/archive/
> are for the non-open-source jdk7.
>
> The binary plugs for recent openjdk7 builds
> are available in non-obvious places like
>
> http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk7/promoted/b45/
>
> but b45 is the oldest a
2009/3/19 Tim Bell :
> Hi Folks
>
> This is part of a project to move fixes that are already in OpenJDK6 forward
> to OpenJDK7.
>
> The fix for http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6695776 will
> remove some binary artifacts from the source tree and instead build them
> from sources w
2009/3/31 Jonathan Gibbons :
> Andrew,
> See this response sent by Tim on March 26.
> -- Jon
>
> Hi Neale:
>
> I’m trying to build the JDK for the first time. I grabbed the sources from
> the mercurial repository and followed the FAQ to perform the build. It
> builds a heap of stuff before it dies
2009/3/31 Tim Bell :
> Clearly this review is of interest to a wider audience.
>
> This fixes the build problem Jon found and reported as 6819847
>
> Until the fix is approved and pushed, the workaround is to add:
>
> Â IMPORT_BINARY_PLUGS=true
>
> to your build environment.
> Tim
>
> Orig
2009/3/31 Tim Bell :
>
>
>>> Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I didn't think openjdk7 could build without binary plugs.
>>>> But I've been a bit disconnected from the jdk work lately.
>
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>
>> I
2009/3/31 Tim Bell :
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>
>> ERROR: Can't locate pre-built libraries.
>> Â Â Â Please check your access to
>>
>> /NOT-SET/re/jdk/1.7.0/promoted/latest/openjdk/binaryplugs/linux-amd64
>> Â Â Â and/or check your value of ALT_BINARY_PL
2009/3/31 Andrew Haley :
> Neale Ferguson wrote:
>> I¹m building the OpenJDK6 & 7 by way of the zeroJDK mechanism and am running
>> into problems.
>>
>> Using gij with icedtea6 I get:
>>
>> + CLASSPATH=/home/neale/ecj-3.4.1.jar
>> + /usr/bin/gij org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.batch.Main -1.5 -no
2009/3/31 Tim Bell :
> I wrote:
>
>> One question - if the user goes to the trouble to set any of
>> ALT_BINARY_PLUGS_JARFILE, ALT_BINARY_PLUGS_PATH,
>> ALT_BUILD_BINARY_PLUGS_PATH, ALT_CLOSED_JDK_IMPORT_PATH
>> (See the comments in jdk/make/common/Defs.gmk starting at line 127),
>> should we assum
2009/3/31 Joe Darcy :
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> 2009/3/31 Tim Bell :
>>>
>>> I wrote:
>>>
>>>> One question - if the user goes to the trouble to set any of
>>>> ALT_BINARY_PLUGS_JARFILE, ALT_BINARY_PLUGS_PATH,
>>
2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
> We at Red Hat have noticed that the list of IcedTea local patches has
> been getting large, with some local patches that should have been
> pushed upstream. Â Also, some IcedTea patches have been committed to
> OpenJDK 7 but not OpenJDK 6.
>
> So, we're going to have a seri
2009/4/1 Kelly O'Hair :
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>> We at Red Hat have noticed that the list of IcedTea local patches has
>> been getting large, with some local patches that should have been
>> pushed upstream. Â Also, some IcedTea patches have been committed to
>> OpenJDK 7 but not OpenJDK 6.
>>
>>
2009/4/1 Andrew John Hughes :
> 2009/4/1 Kelly O'Hair :
>> Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>
>>> We at Red Hat have noticed that the list of IcedTea local patches has
>>> been getting large, with some local patches that should have been
>>> pushed upstream.
2009/4/1 Andrew Haley :
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> 2009/4/1 Kelly O'Hair :
>>>
>>> I can certainly help out with any build related (makefiles etc.)
>>> changes.
>>
>> Good, because to my knowledge, those form the majority :)
>>
1 - 100 of 356 matches
Mail list logo
