On 10:41 Wed 04 Jan , Andrew Haley wrote:
On 01/04/2012 06:16 AM, John Von Seggern wrote:
Way back in a bug report for Java 1.4, I found this note:
We statically link the C++ runtime in JDK and enabled linker script
to hide symbols from libstdc++ and other internal symbols.
On 20:43 Wed 04 Jan , John Von Seggern wrote:
Kelly,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. This information is
very helpful.
So in general, doing static linking is a bad idea and should not be done
lightly, if ever.
The most obvious issue for me is security. If a
On 09:11 Wed 09 Nov , Florian Weimer wrote:
* Srinivas Ramakrishna:
Sorry for a rather naive question. I am building openjdk (6) from
scratch for the first time and am running into an issue when building
the AWT classes because of not finding the relevant Motif header files
at the
On 14:28 Fri 14 Oct , fredrik.ohrst...@oracle.com wrote:
Changeset: 984f119f2ea7
Author:ohrstrom
Date: 2011-10-14 16:36 +0200
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/build-infra/jdk7/rev/984f119f2ea7
Jaxws actually depends on jaxp, this becomes obvious when compiling
with a boot
On 13:52 Wed 12 Oct , Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
2011/10/12 Dr Andrew John Hughes ahug...@redhat.com:
FWIW, I recently did exactly that in IcedTea because I'm sick of all the
problems this drop solution causes.
This has cut things down from needing five tarballs (jaxp + jaxws
On 18:25 Wed 03 Aug , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
FYI...
If you are interested in the jdk8 build infrastructure changes coming down
the pipe, I invite you
to join the build-infra-dev alias:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-infra-dev/2011-August/29.html
I expect this work
On 16:02 Mon 01 Aug , Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
On 08/01/2011 02:55 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 11:07 Mon 01 Aug , Alexandre Boulgakov wrote:
Hello Kelly,
Do you know the answer to this one?
Thanks,
Sasha
On 7/29/2011 11:37 AM, Alexandre Boulgakov wrote:
Hello
On 15:02 Thu 28 Jul , Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:32 -0400, Keith McGuigan wrote:
This appears to remove support for version 2.7. Is that intentional?
There has never been a 2.7 kernel.
2.6.39.3 is the last before the 3.0 series.
On 09:17 Thu 28 Jul , Keith McGuigan wrote:
Ok, thanks. Code looks good to me then.
Ok, can I push this or do you still need to do this via JPRT?
Either way, I need a bug ID please.
--
- Keith
On Jul 28, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:32
Hi,
Can someone please tell me why:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/cf4edfcd7119
reverted my earlier fix:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/80368890a2a0
without any discussion?
The correct fix would have been to bump the boot source language/target class
versions to 7,
On 11:58 Wed 27 Jul , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Hi,
Can someone please tell me why:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/cf4edfcd7119
reverted my earlier fix:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev
On 17:12 Wed 27 Jul , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 4:28 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 11:58 Wed 27 Jul , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Hi,
Can someone please tell me why:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net
On 11:24 Sun 10 Jul , Erik Trimble wrote:
Folks,
PPC isn't a currently supported architecture for OpenJDK - that is, no
one has contributed any code to support it. I do know of several
proprietary ports, but that doesn't help. :-) I don't even remember the
last time it was
On 09:59 Wed 15 Jun , Andrew Haley wrote:
On 14/06/11 22:22, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
i had done a contribution to openjdk7 and remembered it was very
hard to setup all the build thinks. Now a want to make some new
contributions and i struggle again with the build setup. How about
On 08:57 Fri 03 Jun , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
The documented Boot JDK to be used when building JDK7 repositories is JDK6
Update 18, as listed here
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#MBE
However, as many people know, JDK releases newer than JDK6u18
On 13:11 Fri 20 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
We now have a Build Infrastructure project!
Register for email at:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/build-infra-dev
The repos will be at:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/build-infra/jdk7
But I haven't been able to populate
On 07:20 Fri 20 May , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 05/20/11 06:24:
On 09:47 Thu 19 May , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 05/19/11 05:29:
On 08:35 Mon 16 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
snip
The -Werror option
On 16:12 Fri 20 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On May 20, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 13:11 Fri 20 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
We now have a Build Infrastructure project!
Register for email at:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/build-infra-dev
On 10:32 Thu 19 May , Alan Bateman wrote:
David Holmes wrote:
:
In contrast, there are basically two Java compilers in general use
(javac and ecj)
and one is part of OpenJDK. Yet, the Java code does not have -Werror
enabled by default and there
are a mass of warnings there as
On 07:25 Mon 16 May , Erik Trimble wrote:
On 5/16/2011 6:03 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/16/2011 12:08 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
The reason I'm asking is that I'm wondering if this is something we
should expect to crop up in different parts of the code base, or
whether it's a one
On 17:32 Tue 10 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I'm a little reluctant to accept this, I'm not sure what the full
ramifications are.
But I think we want it.
Is this in OpenJDK6 now?
OpenJDK6 changes have to go through 7 first, so no. But it's been in IcedTea6
since
before there were
On 15:31 Wed 11 May , bhavesh.pa...@sun.com wrote:
Changeset: 42c22d5a2cd0
Author:bpatel
Date: 2011-05-11 08:30 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/jdk/rev/42c22d5a2cd0
7043684: Update man pages for JDK 7 tools
Reviewed-by: skannan
!
On 21:09 Wed 11 May , Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
Omair,
CR 7043921 . It need someone from jdk team to integrate it.
Omair has commit rights so he can just push it now.
--
Andrew :)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU
On 18:14 Wed 04 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On May 4, 2011, at 5:42 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
7042040: Remove disk space sanity check
Ok, if
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/sync/webrev.02/
looks ok, I'll push it to the build tree.
Files:
jdk/make
On 17:35 Wed 04 May , Omair Majid wrote:
Hi,
Can someone please review the following webrev?
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/no-sync/01/
It modifies the sanity check (under linux) to use df without --sync when
it computes the free space. This is what is done in the
On 15:37 Wed 04 May , David Katleman wrote:
Would be interesting to know the original objection to Andrew's change
last year.
If there was one, it never reached me either publicly or otherwise.
The archives show no responses.
Absent that, I see no reason this could not be removed and
On 16:27 Wed 04 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I agree we should toss the check.
I'll need a bug ID for this.
7042040: Remove disk space sanity check
Ok, if
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/sync/webrev.02/
looks ok, I'll push it to the build tree.
-kto
--
Andrew :)
On 09:23 Mon 02 May , Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
Thanks!
But I am of the strong opinion that the jaxp and jaxws source code should be
committed into the jaxp/jaxws repositories when drops are made.
//Fredrik
+1
--
Andrew :)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
On 08:40 Mon 02 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
There has been a request for essentially that, more transparency on these
sources.
The downloads are also painful, I know.
The issue with these sources is that they are effectively 'generated
sources', transformed
from master sources
On 14:27 Wed 27 Apr , Frédéric Le Mouël wrote:
cd linux_i486_compiler1/product ./test_gamma
java full version 1.6.0_24-b07
Using java runtime at: /opt/sun-jdk-1.6.0.24/jre
java version 1.6.0_24
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_24-b07)
^^^ This bit isn't OpenJDK.
--
Andrew
Is it necessary to have all these posted to build-dev? There doesn't
seem to be any work going on, just merging as far as I can see. Shouldn't
this be on its own deploy-dev list? As far as I'm aware, the deploy team
don't do any OpenJDK work anyway.
On 01:30 Wed 09 Mar ,
On 14:33 Thu 21 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
This started out as an annoyance around the use of -Wno-clobber on Linux when
the gcc might
not support it. Turned into fixing several CC_VER checks in the makefiles:
7038711: Fix CC_VER checks for compiler options, fix use of -Wno-clobber
On 15:14 Fri 15 Apr , Phil Race wrote:
For jpeg its something we could consider for JDK 8 although I think its been
called libjpeg since JDK 1.0 without apparent problems.
But you use an in-tree libjpeg (at least at present).
Having the option of linking against a system libjpeg at compile
On 11:41 Tue 19 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I imagine there are probably hundreds of variable names that if set in the
environment,
could impact the build, on purpose or by accident :^(.
We do check for JAVA_HOME and LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Is JAVAC some kind of typical or standard
On 18:03 Sat 16 Apr , luxInteg wrote:
snip...
What kind of Linux is this?
This is blfs linux built by compiling sources from scratch.
BLFS has instructions on building IcedTea6 which uses OpenJDK6 here:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/cvs/general/icedtea6.html
--
Andrew :)
On 16:18 Tue 12 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 13:46 Tue 12 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Some shared libraries do not have and will not have mapfiles, at least for
now, we
give these an exception to the mapfile check
On 13:46 Tue 12 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Some shared libraries do not have and will not have mapfiles, at least for
now, we
give these an exception to the mapfile check (which just issues a warning).
7033957: Library built without a mapfile: libxinerama.so
On 08:50 Wed 06 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Just an FYI...
Anyone working with C/C++ should be well aware of the functions we should be
avoiding:
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+security/funclist
Microsoft has used the term banned and has a much more extensive
On 20:15 Thu 31 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/31/11 06:31:
On 09:42 Wed 30 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
This change (arrived at by both myself and Gary Benson separately):
http
On 09:42 Wed 30 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
This change (arrived at by both myself and Gary Benson separately):
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbenson/zero-shark-fixes-04-1/
fixes the issue by adding Shark back into the mix
On 08:43 Tue 15 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Mar 15, 2011, at 2:05 AM, Steve Poole wrote:
A singular process that everyone uses? Good Luck with that. I think that
is called herding cats. :^)
Sorry, I've been doing this too long, if there is a variation on doing
development
On 07:59 Wed 16 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Hi Andrew,
See inline ...
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/16/11 07:43:
On 18:05 Tue 15 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
BUILD_CLIENT_ONLY:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/jdk-bco/webrev/
Provides support for building
/2011 4:48 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 18:32 Tue 08 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
First, if we talk about the mercurial forests, it has nothing to do with
the Mercurial Forest Extension.
What we really have is a set of nested repositories, sometimes called our
forest
On 06:40 Fri 11 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Fredrik Öhrström said the following on 03/10/11 20:22:
I think it is important that a recent stock mercurial install
can check out the full openjdk with a single clone
command.
I.e. you should not have to install special extensions just
On 17:35 Thu 10 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/10/11 10:26:
On 22:09 Wed 09 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
My original reply does not seem to have made it to build-dev.
I've updated the webrev again to accommodate openjdk builds that set
On 09:33 Wed 09 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Andrew,
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/09/11 03:24:
On 10:51 Tue 08 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Just to clarify for people, BUILD_CLIENT_ONLY refers to building the
client VM only.
Some of these variables should
On 18:32 Tue 08 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
First, if we talk about the mercurial forests, it has nothing to do with the
Mercurial Forest Extension.
What we really have is a set of nested repositories, sometimes called our
forest of repositories.
This email is just about the actual
On 10:51 Tue 08 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Andrew,
Many thanks for the feedback:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/08/11 04:30:
On 09:39 Mon 07 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
General comments:
* Could this not be broken up into smaller changesets to make it easier
On 09:39 Mon 07 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
General comments:
* Could this not be broken up into smaller changesets to make it easier to
review and catch regressions?
* There seem to be some whitespace changes that shouldn't be there.
e.g.
- sane-msvcrt_path \
+ sane-msvcrt_path
On 17:28 Wed 23 Feb , Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 08:26 Tue 22 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:42 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 12:54 Tue 22 Feb , Alan Bateman wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man
On 08:26 Tue 22 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:42 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 12:54 Tue 22 Feb , Alan Bateman wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man page for javaws,
yet there is no javaws implementation
On 00:00 Tue 22 Feb , Bradford Wetmore wrote:
Kelly just wrote:
It's not clear...and slightly augmented by the openjdk bugzilla.
I think Andrew was referring to http://bugs.openjdk.java.net.
I was. I'm not sure what else the phrase OpenJDK bug database
would refer
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man page for javaws,
yet there is no javaws implementation in OpenJDK.
http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=633
This only happens on 32-bit platforms, hence why I've never seen it
myself. I've posted a webrev:
On 12:54 Tue 22 Feb , Alan Bateman wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man page for javaws,
yet there is no javaws implementation in OpenJDK.
http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=633
This only happens on 32-bit
On 18:29 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 18, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
snip
But there have been some roadblocks for the open source community.
It has been observed (for a long time now
On 18:08 Mon 21 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
snip
So this is going to be yet another system? What will happen to the
existing
pretty much unused OpenJDK bug database?
It's not clear. The old Sun bugtraq system
On 18:26 Mon 21 Feb , Brad Wetmore wrote:
Definitely. Making OpenJDK bug DB IDs usable in changesets would be
a good start (probably involves jcheck...)
I'll have to punt on that, someone else is working on it, but the
intent is to have a
completely open bug tracking system that
On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Excuse the long email, sometimes it can't be avoided.
I much prefer long e-mails, especially ones with good news like this,
to things happening behind closed doors :-)
I've been asked to try and start up some discussions around how the
OpenJDK
On 16:38 Thu 10 Feb , Gary Meyer wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:48 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Build folk,
The following fix should make it possible to (again) build langtools on a
Mac.
Dan Smith reports:
- When building the GenStubs in OS X, the Java 6 tools classes are
On 07:57 Fri 11 Feb , Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
On 02/11/2011 07:09 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 16:38 Thu 10 Feb , Gary Meyer wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:48 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Build folk,
The following fix should make it possible to (again) build langtools
On 19:45 Tue 08 Feb , Rinaldo DiGiorgio wrote:
On Feb 8, 2011, at 7:34 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I take that back. Welcome rinaldo to the OpenJDK commit list!
I will put you down as a reviewer. I didn't think you had the OpenJDK ID
yet.
Thanks -- never expected to be here from
On 12:34 Wed 09 Feb , Rinaldo DiGiorgio wrote:
has a new process
and alias for getting access, once you send to it you get an invitation to
join.
Response was very fast and you get a nice form to fill out.
Is this new process documented somewhere?
I may have
On 16:43 Wed 02 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 2, 2011, at 1:56 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Some messages in the build logs are getting corrupted, perhaps
because of parallism. For example,
../../../src/plugin/solaris/jvm_natives/server.c:2031: warning: cast
to pointer
On 19:33 Mon 24 Jan , Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, January 24, 2011 18:00, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 01/24/2011 04:54 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
http://download.java.net/jaxp/1.4.5/dev/jaxp-1_4_5-dev.zip
TVM,
I made sure to place a copy in the icedtea drops backup dir just
in
On 16:46 Wed 05 Jan , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Need reviewer: Remove SKIP_OPENJDK_BUILD
Now that the binary plugs are gone, this logic doesn't make much sense.
7009969: Remove SKIP_OPENJDK_BUILD from top Makefile
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk7/jdk7-build-skip-openjdk/webrev/
On 11:48 Tue 04 Jan , Andrew Haley wrote:
On 01/03/2011 03:09 AM, Lussier, Denis wrote:
I too like the idea that the version of OpenJDK that comes pre-built with
your Linux distro is pre-installed and just works. But... I wonder how/if
the Linux Distro's will configure simultaneously
On 15:50 Tue 28 Dec , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
These changes are only adding the year 2010, to the copyright for
files modified in 2010.
The first year should be preserved.
The pattern YEAR1, YEAR2, in the Oracle copyright line is the
equivalent of the old Sun
copyright year range
On 09:56 Thu 23 Dec , Andrew Haley wrote:
On 12/23/2010 05:32 AM, David Holmes wrote:
Kelly O'Hair said the following on 12/23/10 11:51:
Need reviewer: OpenJDK7 binary plug logic removal
7008723: Remove binary plugs creation and use from openjdk
On 14:19 Wed 22 Dec , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Dec 22, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 16:29 Tue 21 Dec , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I'm back with another stab at a webrev and modified proposal.
6989472: Provide simple jdk identification information in the install
not it. I have never installed or setup NFS
on this laptop - and I installed Fedora 14 from scratch on it recently.
On 12/10/2010 07:10 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Easiest thing to try is to set ALT_OUTPUTDIR to a directory on a local
disk. I've not had problems with having the source on NFS
On 14:44 Mon 29 Nov , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Need reviewers and comments:
6989472: Provide simple jdk identification information in the
install image
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk7/jdk_release/webrev/
With JDK6 Updates we purposely resisted many rebranding changes
On 15:08 Mon 29 Nov , Dalibor Topic wrote:
On 11/26/10 3:54 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 11/26/2010 02:48 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
Hm. It's been a long time since I heard of anyone use the binary plugs for
anything.
Certainly neither regular OpenJDK builds nor IcedTea builds do. So
On 09:38 Thu 25 Nov , Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Wed, 2010-11-24 at 20:39 -0600, kevin diggs wrote:
This question is a little ... weird ... but ...
Is the thought of trying to build your sdk with gcj ... heresy (sp?).
If not please give me ... your thought as to whether it has any
On 11:36 Wed 24 Nov , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Dang... just shoot me now. :^(
Try this:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk7/nonfcs-version/webrev/
Sorry about that.
Looks ok to me.
I assume the motivation is so that MILESTONE doesn't have to be duplicated
in setting
On 22:15 Mon 22 Nov , Patrick Reinhart wrote:
Am 22.11.10 22:09, schrieb Dr Andrew John Hughes:
I'm quite puzzled as to how this hasn't been spotted before now, but I
tried to build jdk7/jdk7 today (b118 from hg), using exactly the same
script as I usually do, and immediately failed due
On 14:06 Mon 22 Nov , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Nov 22, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 22:15 Mon 22 Nov , Patrick Reinhart wrote:
Am 22.11.10 22:09, schrieb Dr Andrew John Hughes:
I'm quite puzzled as to how this hasn't been spotted before now,
but I
tried
, David Holmes wrote:
Any enlightenment on how this only just started happening? Has the
alsa check been disabled previously?
David
Kelly O'Hair said the following on 11/23/10 08:06:
On Nov 22, 2010, at 1:53 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 22:15 Mon 22 Nov , Patrick Reinhart
On 18 November 2010 12:44, Jonathan Tripathy jon...@abpni.co.uk wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Does the OpenJDK project have any Field of Use restrictions? Are
kiosk/set top box style installation allowed?
Thanks
http://openjdk.java.net/legal/
--
Andrew :-)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
On 09:27 Thu 18 Nov , Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 11:31 +0530, ramakanth varala wrote:
My target is to get openjdk build for target board (ARM) .
In the process i thought i would build openjdk first to my host
machine i.e of fedora 8.
Fedora 8 is very outdated (3
On 09:30 Wed 17 Nov , Gary Benson wrote:
Hi Ramakanth,
It looks like you're using IcedTea, so I'm copying in distro-pkg-dev
which is the mailing list most IcedTea stuff is discussed on.
It also looks like you're using Fedora 8, which is very old. I'm not
saying you won't be able to
On 9 November 2010 17:41, Pete Brunet peter.bru...@oracle.com wrote:
I notice that com/sun/image is missing from my OpenJDK7 clone, i.e. it's
not in the classes directory or the rt.jar files in the two image
directores (jre and jdk). Also the demo itself isn't in the OpenJDK7
tree. Both the
On 20 October 2010 13:07, Andreas Kohn andreas.k...@fredhopper.com wrote:
Hi,
I wanted to update my local JDK7 build, and stumbled across a problem
when building with a JDK7 from ~2010-09-10:
build-bootstrap-javac:
[javac] Compiling 78 source files to
On 21 September 2010 07:33, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
This appears to be another case where the hotspot and jdk repo makefiles
differ.
hotspot does:
# statically link libgcc and/or libgcc_s, libgcc does not exist before
gcc-3.x.
ifneq (${CC_VER_MAJOR}, 2)
STATIC_LIBGCC
On 18 August 2010 09:53, Gary Benson gben...@redhat.com wrote:
Christian Thalinger wrote:
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 13:51 -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I had assumed this was a file in the hotspot repo, but it's
actually in the top repo. Feel free to push this change into
the tl forest, or
On 24 August 2010 13:18, Dr Andrew John Hughes ahug...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18 August 2010 09:53, Gary Benson gben...@redhat.com wrote:
Christian Thalinger wrote:
On Tue, 2010-08-17 at 13:51 -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I had assumed this was a file in the hotspot repo, but it's
actually
On 13 August 2010 16:58, Kelly O'Hair kelly.oh...@oracle.com wrote:
On Aug 13, 2010, at 1:49 AM, Gary Benson wrote:
Dalibor Topic wrote:
On 8/12/10 10:58 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
There isn't a document but I'm happy to write one if you'd like,
either as a section of README-builds.html or a
86 matches
Mail list logo
