Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [PATCH] Build fails to compile jchuff.c

I agree with what Erik said on build-dev that being specific about the tool chain and the reason are worthwhile and important. We've done that in similar cases. Also these review threads usually should have a subject like RFR: : which means you first need a bug id .. the patch can't be

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [PATCH] Build fails to compile jchuff.c

Try again with build-dev cc'd .. -phil. On 01/18/2018 11:14 AM, Phil Race wrote: I agree with what Erik said on build-dev that being specific about the tool chain and the reason are worthwhile and important. We've done that in similar cases. Also these review threads usually should have

Re: RFR: JDK-8192854 FONTCONFIG_CFLAGS missing from spec.gmk.in

+1 -phil. On 12/04/2017 02:18 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: By oversight, when the external fontconfig was introduced in JDK-8170681, spec.gmk.in was not updated to actually include FONTCONFIG_CFLAGS (but it was properly exported from lib-fontconfig.m4 and included in the AWT makefile).

Re: [10] Review Request: 8189656 The Windows L should be moved out from the shared folder

I see this opens was moved to platform-specific code ... 115 opens com.sun.java.swing.plaf.windows to 116 jdk.jconsole; So jdk.jconsole definitely accesses this only on Windows ? -phil. On 11/28/2017 09:28 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: From a build point of view, this looks great. /Erik On

Re: RFR: 8170681 : Remove fontconfig header files from JDK source tree

Updated webrev posted as http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8170681.1 -phil. On 10/25/2017 01:04 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, Expanding the help as Sergey suggests is a good idea. The package on Ubuntu is called libfontconfig1-dev and on Redhat fontconfig-devel. In lib-fontconfig.m4, line

Re: RFR: JDK-8189682: JDK demos/tests should be in a separate bundle than hotspot ones

I've looked at the code and tested this too .. looks good. Thanks, -phil. On 10/23/2017 07:39 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: This patch adds building of a new test bundle containing just the remaining demos, which are used for client testing. It's basically resurrecting the build logic for the old

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8184813:Class javax/swing/plaf/metal/MetalFontDesktopProperty is broken in JDK10

+1 -phil. On 07/20/2017 01:45 AM, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote: Hi All, This is a back-out of 6461834: Minimize WindowsLookAndFeel classes included with Unix JDKs fix which was done to make sure WindowsLookAndFeel classes are not built for non-windows platform but it seems there are some

Re: [10] RFR JDK-6461834: Minimize WindowsLookAndFeel classes included with Unix JDKs

The way to do this is to create a file src/java.desktop/windows/classes/module-info.java.extra and move the opens there. See for example src/java.base/windows/classes/module-info.java.extra But are you sure jdk.jconsole needs these only on Windows ? Better make sure of it. -phil. On

Re: RFR: 8173801 Modify makefiles to not build demos and samples bundles.

And to be clear, the provision for still building these client demos needs to be made BEFORE this is pushed. Or at least as *part* of this push. Else we will be unable to perform our normal integration testing at this critical juncture of JDK 9 .. -phil. On 03/03/2017 09:39 AM, Phil Race

Re: RFR: 8173801 Modify makefiles to not build demos and samples bundles.

What is the plan for ensuring there is still a way to build the client demos - which are not being removed but just moved. Doesn't this makefile need to be somewhere still ? -phil. On 3/3/2017 12:18 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2017-03-02 20:33, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Hi, Could

Re: Building latest jdk9 dev on Mac OS X 10.12.1 - Undefined symbols (_libiconv) causing build to fail?

A complete stab in the dark, but did you install the xcode command line tools ? -phil. On 12/15/2016 07:24 AM, Martijn Verburg wrote: Hi Erik, Thanks, that's fine. As an FYI I swapped to using gcc and g++ compilers but still get the same error so more digging is required, will update here

Re: Freetype enabled in configure.sh, yes still not used

On 12/15/2016 05:16 AM, Artur Rataj wrote: By the way, are you shure that 2d-dev is the correct mailing list? yes it is. Isn't Java2D rendering the glyph data as any other shape, i.e. a font rasterizer is not used? wrong. Java 2D uses a font rasteriser. Anyway, it seems that OpenJDK for

Re: RfR JDK-8167213 Move include/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c to the source directory

+1. I am assuming you made sure AccessBridgeCalls.c is not being compiled during the JDK build as discussed earlier ... -phil. On 10/31/2016 07:36 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: On 10/28/16 8:14 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: On Oct 28, 2016, at 1:59 PM, Philip Race wrote: If it

Re: RfR JDK-8167213 Move include/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c to the source directory

On 10/27/2016 11:52 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: On 10/27/16 1:47 PM, Pete Brunet wrote: On 10/27/16 1:34 PM, Phil Race wrote: In which case be careful it is not built by the JDK build .. Build team, Is there anything I need to handle here to make sure it isn't? Actually, let me give it a try. I

Re: RfR JDK-8167213 Move include/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c to the source directory

In which case be careful it is not built by the JDK build .. unless that is actually required .. which I didn't think it was. -phil. On 10/27/2016 11:30 AM, Mandy Chung wrote: Please move AccessBridgeCalls.c to src/jdk.accessibility/windows/native/bridge directory.

Re: RfR JDK-8167213 Move include/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c to the source directory

No, we are definitely shipping those. Unless of course you think we should stop shipping JNI headers too ... -phil On 10/27/2016 10:37 AM, Mandy Chung wrote: Should they be kept just in the source and not to be included in the image/include directory? It’s not clear to me if anyone needs

Re: RfR JDK-8167213 Move include/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c to the source directory

This all seems fine. Do other accessbridge files still have the remnants of SCCS ? :- That was purged from all the other JDK files when we moved to mercurial. 33 /* 34 * @(#)AccessBridgeCalls.c 1.25 05/08/22 35 */ If "yes", then I suggest to file a clean-up bug to clean up all of

Re: RfR JDK-8167213 Move include/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c to the source directory

One big problem I see with this is that it means they will only be available under the GPL license as they will not be in an Oracle JDK which strips the GPL So if you are going to do this then these files first need to be dual-licensed because otherwise people can't link their commercial

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [REGRESSION?] Build warnings at jdhuff.c with GCC 6

On 08/23/2016 08:47 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Hello, > > I do agree that maintaining the list of disabled warnings will be > impossible unless we have a structured way of tracking for which > compiler versions we disable what. Ideally we should be able to easily > add conditions for when certain

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

rds, Ajit -Original Message- From: Phil Race Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 2:02 AM To: Ajit Ghaisas Cc: Sergey Bylokhov; Erik Joelsson; 2d-dev; awt-...@openjdk.java.net; build-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: [9] Fix for JDK-8074824: Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_x

Re: Building JDK9 fails on OS X El Capitan

I expect this is the SDK version you are using more than the OS version. 10.9 is the supported SDK. Any changes to this particular code should be discussed on 2d-...@openjdk.java.net since they would not be build changes But that might not be sufficient .. you could encounter other issues

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 (

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

-Phil. > On Jul 3, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Phil Race <philip.r...@oracle.com> wrote: > > It is it all "extensions". That should have read : It is "not" all ... - Phil > It is mostly just different internal code as far as we (se client) are > con

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

It is it all "extensions". It is mostly just different internal code as far as we (se client) are concerned so the word extension has entirely the wrong connotation for people in SE api land. -Phil. > On Jul 3, 2016, at 4:01 PM, David Holmes wrote: > > Hi Erik, > >>

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

erik, SUPPRESS_CUSTOM_SOURCE" FWIW "CLOSED" implies better to me what this is about than "CUSTOM". Can't this be SUPPRESS_CLOSED_SOURCE ? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8003593/webrev.01/jdk/make/mapfiles/libfontmanager/mapfile-vers.sdiff.html Regarding all the freetype symbols in here ..

Re: Fix for JDK-8074829 : Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_headless

://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aghaisas/8074829/webrev.01/ The changes are exactly the same between webrev.00 & webrev.01. Request you to kindly review and approve again. Regards, Ajit -Original Message- From: Phil Race Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 10:05 PM To: Ajit Ghaisas Cc: Sergey Bylokhov; 2d

Re: Fix for JDK-8074829 : Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_headless

-Original Message- From: Phil Race Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 1:43 AM To: Ajit Ghaisas Cc: Sergey Bylokhov; 2d-dev; build-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: Fix for JDK-8074829 : Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_headless > Another solution is to exclude this file from HEADLESS compilat

Re: RFR: JDK-8156837: RC resource compilation on windows generates false build failure reports

+1 -phil. On 05/12/2016 11:02 AM, Tim Bell wrote: Erik: Looks good to me as well. /Tim On 05/12/16 04:06, Erik Joelsson wrote: Good point, the quotes are certainly not necessary. Removed and updated review in place. Verified that it still works. /Erik On 2016-05-12 12:49, Vadim

Re: Mac build failing

The usual one --disable-warnings-as-errors when running configure. -phil. On 05/09/2016 01:11 PM, Pete Brunet wrote: Thanks Phil, I asked in the bug but will ask here too - is there a workaround until the issue is resolved? In my case I have 6.2 and 7.3.1. Pete On 5/9/16 2:29 PM, Phil Race

Re: Mac build failing

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152856 -phil. On 05/09/2016 12:20 PM, Pete Brunet wrote: Am running into a build problem on Mac. Creating libjvm.dylib from 771 file(s) In file included from

Re: Fix for JDK-8074829 : Resolve disabled warnings for libawt_headless

> Another solution is to exclude this file from HEADLESS compilation. > I am not sure how to achieve it. Any suggestion? I suppose that is possible and I expect we can do that See in the make file, where I think you just need to add entries to LIBAWT_HEADLESS_EXCLUDES := medialib although

Re: Mac build failing: error: sending 'id' to parameter of incompatible type 'id'

This is bug https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134884 I am not sure about the bit where refreshing your repo triggered it since I don't think the source code changed recently, so perhaps something in your installed tool chain changed recently since it reads to me like a particular

Re: [9] RFR: JDK-8074826,,Resolve disabled warnings for liblcms

Sorry, no we don't want this patch. We are not fixing warnings in upstream libraries. -phil. On 04/01/2016 03:57 AM, prasanta sadhukhan wrote: Hi All, Please review a fix to remove the disabled warnings from lcms library Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074826 webrev:

Re: State of Java printing on Mac

Hi, First, this is the wrong list entirely - this is list is about how to build openjdk from source, and all lists on this site are about source development so this is the one -and-only reply on this list. If you really need to follow up go to 2d-...@openjdk.java.net which superseded a

Re: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval for bug 8147807: crash in libkcms.so on linux-sparc

+1 -phil. On 02/15/2016 01:02 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Looks good. /Erik On 2016-02-12 10:15, Seán Coffey wrote: Approved for jdk8u-dev once you have a peer code review. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/2016 08:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: I forgot to add jdk8u-dev list... On 11.02.2016 17:19, Alexey

Re: problems with freetype.dll, jdk 8 and windows

On 03/07/2016 08:11 AM, Hendrik Schreiber wrote: - System Setup: freetype is listed as a requirement for Linux and Solaris. But not for Windows. I don't think that is completely accurate. There is some additional mention in Unix sections regarding what to install to make your life easier,

Re: CLANG special case

Ideally hotspot would review this, not build. so it would be helpful if hotspot found an engineer to own the bug :- https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8138820 So far as I know this is not tracked under any other bug id. -phil. On 10/06/2015 05:30 AM, Jim Laskey (Oracle) wrote: I’ve

Re: RFR(xxs): [windows] Build broken on VS2010 after "8046148: JEP 158: Unified JVM Logging"

Because lots of people do not yet have VS2013. The official compilers are not the only ones we should support. They are just the ones RE uses. I would call this a "must fix". -phil. On 09/29/2015 08:12 AM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Ok, I did not check this. Nevermind, then. Kind Regards, Thomas

Re: [9] Review Request: 8079965 Stop ignoring warnings for libawt_lwawt

Approved. -phil. On 09/25/2015 10:07 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hi, Phil. Here is an updated version: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8079965/webrev.02 The CPrinterJob.m is changed only. jprt build passed. But I cannot verify osx 10.8, I have not it. On 25.09.15 1:57, Phil Race wrote

Re: [9] Review Request: 8079965 Stop ignoring warnings for libawt_lwawt

On 9/24/2015 1:05 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: On 23.09.15 23:58, Phil Race wrote: IMO we should support building JDK on as many platforms as possible. Not just the RE-blessed platform of the day which can change more often than I can - or want to - update my systems as I need to build multiple

Re: [9] Review Request: 8079965 Stop ignoring warnings for libawt_lwawt

the types in CPrinterJob [1] via ifdef, but actually do we support sdk 10.8 in jdk9? [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8079965/webrev.01/src/java.desktop/macosx/native/libawt_lwawt/awt/CPrinterJob.m.sdiff.html On 23.09.15 23:34, Phil Race wrote: This looks OK except that I have

Re: [9] Review Request: 8079965 Stop ignoring warnings for libawt_lwawt

This looks OK except that I have a suggestion with regards to Apple's (gratuitous!) enum change OpenOffice solved this with an ifdef https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/main/vcl/aqua/source/gdi/salprn.cxx?r1=1591062=1633297=1633297 --

Re: How to make install images

Pete, The windows installer is not part of OpenJDK so you should redirect this question to a different list. -phil. On 09/01/2015 10:02 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: Hi, How do I make an install image (not just the binary trees I see with make images)? I need to do a 32 bit build on 64 bit W7 and

Re: Change in hotspot causing build issues on OSX 10.8.5

The problem with this specific warning is it is in a 3rd party library. I generally opt for just disabling those until upstream resolves it. -phil. On 09/01/2015 09:46 AM, David DeHaven wrote: and now get the warnings: - Compiling 13 files for jdk.policytool clang: error: unknown

Re: [8u66] 8130938: Incomplete 8ux fix for 8071710: libfontmanager t2k should link against headless awt on solaris

snapshot. [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u66.html Regards, Sean. On 21/07/2015 20:11, Phil Race wrote: Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130938 8071710 fixed the issue of libfontmanager and libt2k linking against X11 on JDK 9 for Solaris. This was subsequently

[8u66] 8130938: Incomplete 8ux fix for 8071710: libfontmanager t2k should link against headless awt on solaris

Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130938 8071710 fixed the issue of libfontmanager and libt2k linking against X11 on JDK 9 for Solaris. This was subsequently backported to JDK8u but one line was missed so incorrectly libt2k still depends on X11 libraries on 8u. This is a

Re: official compiler for Solaris jdk9 build?

On 06/05/2015 07:30 AM, Tim Bell wrote: Hi I would not recommend copying files off some other system. The last time I started with a brand-new minimal Solaris 11.x install, I needed to add: sudo pkg install gnu-tar system/header system/picl x11/library/libx11 x11/library/libxrender

Re: official compiler for Solaris jdk9 build?

E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED is a favourite of SunStudio and I recently fixed one such warning (in closed code so I can't point to it here) but I did not see this one .. however I was using jprt and locally Solaris 10 SPARC. So perhaps it is something to do with the headers ? Ironically the warning

Re: AWT Dev RFR: 8081447: System JPEG builds include in-tree jpeglib.h, resulting in build failure

Looks OK to me. I've added 2d-dev (owner of the lib). I don't think this will cause any issue for closed builds but we'll address it if it does. -phil. On 5/28/15 7:25 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081447 Webrev:

Re: AWT Dev RfR JDK-8077296 RE build fails on non-Win builds when attempting to build Win only javadoc

+1 -phil. On 05/21/2015 12:11 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello Pete, This looks good to me. /Erik On 2015-05-21 07:33, Pete Brunet wrote: Please review the following change for 8u: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ptbrunet/JDK-8077296/webrev.00/ Background: - As part of the open sourcing of the

Re: 9 b58 fails on Win 8 when screen reader running

Perhaps JAWS is not well behaved w.r.t multiple DLL versions ? Does it happen only on win 8 ? If you boot the same system into win 8 or win 8.1 is it OK ? What do you see logged by hotspot from typing Ctrl-Break in the shell ? Other than that, debugging is very likely going to require you

Re: jdk9 windows build failure

What makes java.xml.bind so special that make 3.81 should barf on it, but no other modules? Nothing that I can see. Its very strange. -phil. On 04/16/2015 02:02 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-04-15 01:44, David Katleman wrote: We went through this exercise in January. RE

Re: jdk9 windows build failure

, JDK-8072023 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072023. Until we update gnumake for windows (JDK-8072023 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072023), issues like what Phil found with gnumake 3.81 should be fixed. Thanks Dave On 4/14/2015 3:42 PM, Phil Race wrote

Re: jdk9 windows build failure

in the same error I reported in my initial email. Exactly how did you run make to have this happen? I typed make :-). Running in a cygwin shell that is inside a cmd.exe shell (not a cygwin window). Same as I have always done. -phil. /Erik On 2015-04-11 00:39, Phil Race wrote: For some

Re: jdk9 windows build failure

of cygwin make (3.81). Updating my path to pick up a newer cygwin version (4.1) it went smoothly. Maybe the README-builds.html should not say Any GNU make 3.81 or newer -phil. On 4/14/2015 10:41 AM, Phil Race wrote: On 4/12/2015 11:34 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: That looks weird. What does your

jdk9 windows build failure

For some time (a couple of weeks) I have run into the following error whenever I try to build on Windows on my system I've been using forever .. I have worked around it by doing builds using JPRT but its getting annoying. Does anyone have a clue what I am doing wrong. This happens on brand new

Re: RfR JDK-8076552 nightly build break fix

Isn't it sufficient to comment out this one line ? 1215 ALL_OTHER_TARGETS += jaccessdocs .. and add a comment as to why ? -phil. On 04/08/2015 10:25 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: Here is an updated patch. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ptbrunet/JDK-8076552/webrev.02/ It simply removes the

Re: RfR JDK-8076552 nightly build break fix

from make docs that there is no javadoc generated for this package on windows build. Mandy On 4/8/2015 10:29 AM, Phil Race wrote: Isn't it sufficient to comment out this one line ? 1215 ALL_OTHER_TARGETS += jaccessdocs .. and add a comment as to why ? -phil. On 04/08/2015 10:25 AM, Pete

Re: RFR: JDK-8076531: Switch default compiler on Windows to VS2013

I am a bit surprised to note we'd prefer 2012 over 2010. .. and that we'd been preferring it over 2013. Seems odd to have a version that was never the 'official' compiler be preferred over offical versions. It won't affect me as I don't have 2012 but might affect someone else. So if someone has

Re: AWT Dev RfR JDK-8055831 Open Source Java Access Bridge

AWTEventMonitor.java has a bunch of deprecated methods. If you don't have time now (I expect you don't) then it can be revisited later. Open sourcing is different than binary compatibility. The change jdk/make/copy/Copy-java.gmk suggests that accessbridge is the only reason the closed version of

Re: AWT Dev RfR JDK-8055831 Open Source Java Access Bridge

On 3/25/2015 10:58 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: Thanks Phil, On 3/25/15 11:26 AM, Phil Race wrote: AWTEventMonitor.java has a bunch of deprecated methods. If you don't have time now (I expect you don't) then it can be revisited later. Open sourcing is different than binary compatibility. These were

Windows configure error : LZMAPATH

I'll admit its been a few weeks since I've build JDK on Windows except via jprt but now I can't get past configure and I don't know why its resolving a variable that I didn't set instead of looking on my path .. checking Checking for install src... not found, cannot build installer checking

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8075277 : JDK is still building X11 related Java files on OSX

One more update: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8075277.2/ just adds sun/awt/motif/* to the exclude list. I'm deleting that directory in another fix but those without those changes need it excluded too -phil. On 3/16/15 3:05 PM, Phil Race wrote: There are some files in sun/print some

RFR: 8075277 : JDK is still building X11 related Java files on OSX

Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075277 Fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8075277/ Although a more complete fix would do something like refactor the source files, as that would be less fragile amongst other things, this at least gets us into a better shape with minimal

Re: RFR: 8075277 : JDK is still building X11 related Java files on OSX

There are some files in sun/print some directories still being used but for the files explicitly listed, then in each case all .java files in those directories are now unused. So yes, I can make this cleaner and less fragile too! http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8075277.1/ -phil.* * On 3/16/15

Re: RFR: 8074910 hgforest.sh needs an option to bring over a smaller set of extra repos

, Phil Race wrote: Right now to get the extra repos you do sh get_source.sh http://server.whatits.org This gets more than most people need which wastes time and disk. Here is a small change such that you can now do sh get_source.sh jdk http://server.whatits.org ie add jdk to indicate you'd like only

RFR: 8074910 hgforest.sh needs an option to bring over a smaller set of extra repos

Right now to get the extra repos you do sh get_source.sh http://server.whatits.org This gets more than most people need which wastes time and disk. Here is a small change such that you can now do sh get_source.sh jdk http://server.whatits.org ie add jdk to indicate you'd like only the repos

Re: AWT Dev RFR: JDK-8074096 Disable (most) native warnings in JDK on a per-library basis

I like the overall approach. We can then attack the warnings lib by lib and/or platform by platform. I do want to mention that some libs like liblcms are 3rd party open source libraries and it may not always be possible to convince upstream to change their code. -phil. On 03/04/2015 08:30

Re: RFR: 8072116: [Solaris] : Fix for 8071710 needs to be updated for build dependency checking

, Phil Race wrote: On 02/03/2015 05:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-02-02 19:33, Phil Race wrote: http://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 added a depedency check but it was not working because this depends on file declaration order. This resolves that which can cause

Re: RFR: 8072116: [Solaris] : Fix for 8071710 needs to be updated for build dependency checking

On 02/03/2015 05:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-02-02 19:33, Phil Race wrote: http://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 added a depedency check but it was not working because this depends on file declaration order. This resolves that which can cause occasional Solaris build

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8071710: [solaris] libfontmanager should be linked against headless awt library

. On 01/28/2015 05:15 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-27 22:24, Phil Race wrote: Hi, A mistake was made in JDK 8 so that the font libraries for Solaris are now being linked against X11 libraries and this is a problem for headless (server) use For more details see : https

RFR: 8071710: [solaris] libfontmanager should be linked against headless awt library

Hi, A mistake was made in JDK 8 so that the font libraries for Solaris are now being linked against X11 libraries and this is a problem for headless (server) use For more details see : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 I am presenting jdk 9 8 fixes here since this needs a

Re: Modular Run-Time Images build fails with JDK8u25 as bootstrap JDK

yep lots of people have reported this/seen this -phil. On 12/6/14 1:03 PM, Stuart Marks wrote: [Adding build-dev to let them know others are seeing this. I'm not on jigsaw-dev though so this might not make it there.] Hi Peter, I ran into this myself the other day and had a wrestling match

Re: RFR(XXS): 8062312: OpenJDK build fails when bundling freetype libraries

Looks good. -phil. On 10/28/2014 12:18 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: Hi, could you please review the following tiny change which fixes the copy step of the freetype libraries after 8058756: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/8062312/ https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062312

Re: Building on Windoze (64 bit)

It isn't searching for X11. It is searching for freetype which has no X dependencies. freetype is needed on all platforms. -phil. On 10/28/2014 12:25 PM, Dave Pointon wrote: Hi again all , Pray tell, does anyone on here have any problem building on 64 bit Windoze for a 64 bit Windoze target

Re: RFR: JDK-8062159: Fix Xrender check to work with sysroot

Ditto. -phil. On 10/27/2014 10:33 AM, Tim Bell wrote: Erik: Please review this small fix. In configure, there is a check on Solaris 10 for the definition of XLinearGradient in Xrender.h. The check is crude in that it's just a plain grep. It also isn't checking the correct file if using a

Re: Build failures in crypto libraries

I reported this last night David Holmes said this bug was filed :- https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061574 -phil. On 10/21/2014 9:11 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote: I am seeing mysterious build failures on solaris (and solaris only), that don't seem related to my patch I'm trying to commit.

Re: RFR 8046002: Move Ucrypto to the open jdk repo

hudson builds are now failing as below. Did this change below break dev ? Compiling ec2_aff.c (for libsunec.so) /localtools/solaris-amd64/SUNWspro/SS12u3-Solaris10u6/SS12u3-slim/bin/cc -DTRACING -DMACRO_MEMSYS_OPS -DBREAKPTS -DcpuIntel -Di586 -Damd64 -D_LITTLE_ENDIAN= -DSOLARIS -DARCH='amd64'

Re: AWT Dev RFR: 8056216 : Remove sun directory layer from libawt and common

. A find/replace operation should work. It probably makes sense to push all changes together. Regards, Sean. [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/docs/portingScript.html On 19/09/14 09:28, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-09-18 22:42, Phil Race wrote: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK

Re: RFR: 8058756: OpenJDK builds fail on Windows - cannot copy freetype.dll

I had considered that but thought that mkdir was more obvious. I've tried $(install-file) and it seems to work too .. so if that's what people prefer I'll use that (as below). -phil. hg diff make/copy/Copy-java.desktop.gmk diff --git a/make/copy/Copy-java.desktop.gmk

RFR: 8056216 : Remove sun directory layer from libawt and common

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8056216 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8056216/ This is all just removing the sequence sun/ from various pathnames. Aside from the make file changes there are over 600 file moves which I don't think its worth including in the webrev but they are the

Re: Review request JDK-8058367: Add verify-modules target to the default and images target

My assumption is the opposite, that most people type 'make' and nothing more, expecting that if you had to do more to test a code change builds properly, it would be included in the default target. If you aren't affecting the images, then you don't expect to need to build the images. -phil. On

Re: Review request JDK-8058367: Add verify-modules target to the default and images target

Looks good to me. -phil. On 9/12/2014 1:48 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: With the Modular Source Code [1] in JDK 9, the verify-modules target was added in the build to catch any regression to the module boundaries. It's important to catch this regression early during jdk development. This patch

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8056213 : Clean up unix/native/common/sun/awt

:f08705540498 parent: 10505:88856f58680f user:chegar date:Sun Aug 17 15:54:13 2014 +0100 summary: 8054834: Modular Source Code -phil. On 09/11/2014 02:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-09-10 23:10, Phil Race wrote: Updated webrev :- http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr

Re: RFR: 8056213 : Clean up unix/native/common/sun/awt

AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-09-09 23:17, Phil Race wrote: After looking at the issues in the bug report below I think the only think that must be fixed is the unnecessary inclusion of initIDS.c in libawt_xawt.so You are correct indeed. I had missed the fact that awt_Font.c, fontpath.c

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8056213 : Clean up unix/native/common/sun/awt

of checks in the classes for headless So I'll leave the OS X files alone -phil. On 09/10/2014 12:37 PM, Phil Race wrote: That means that instead of having to add even more excludes, you can delete some existing Doing that leaves just this one :- ifeq ($(OPENJDK_TARGET_OS), macosx

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8056213 : Clean up unix/native/common/sun/awt

Updated webrev :- http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8056213.1/ -phil. On 09/10/2014 01:28 PM, Phil Race wrote: I now see InitIDs.m defines more stubs than initIDs.c since 1) some stubs for xawt are instead defined in XToolkit.c 2) some xawt cases (eg Button) have more than an empty stub

RFR: 8056213 : Clean up unix/native/common/sun/awt

After looking at the issues in the bug report below I think the only think that must be fixed is the unnecessary inclusion of initIDS.c in libawt_xawt.so https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8056213 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8056213/ I've tested this out on Linux and am submitting a

Re: RFR: 8056209 : Remove unused files for libawt

Actually, we need to update the makefiles as well, since these are listed as exceptions. Gosh ... I should have remembered that to begin with. Here's the fixed patch http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8056209.1 -phil On 09/05/2014 03:01 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-09-04 23:48, Phil

Re: RFR: 8056209 : Remove unused files for libawt

PS i filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8057711 to track D3DShaderGen.c -phil. On 09/05/2014 08:59 AM, Phil Race wrote: Actually, we need to update the makefiles as well, since these are listed as exceptions. Gosh ... I should have remembered that to begin with. Here's

RFR: 8056209 : Remove unused files for libawt

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8056209 Proposed removing several files ./windows/native/libawt/sun/java2d/d3d/D3DPipeline.cpp ./windows/native/libawt/sun/java2d/d3d/D3DShaderGen.c ./windows/native/libawt/sun/windows/WBufferStrategy.cpp After some analysis the actual list of files

Re: AWT Dev RFR [9] Modular Source Code

* All of the awt-related directories (libawt_* and common) include an unnecessary extra layer, the sun directory. It is not needed anymore, Let's *not* do that. It also affects the destination package. Remember sun.* is the protected top-level package .. and people won't always be running in

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] AWT Dev RFR [9] Modular Source Code

On 8/28/2014 12:36 PM, Phil Race wrote: * All of the awt-related directories (libawt_* and common) include an unnecessary extra layer, the sun directory. It is not needed anymore, Let's *not* do that. It also affects the destination package. Remember sun.* is the protected top-level package

incremental builds in the new JDK9 modular build

I understood we now build individual modules so when I touched one java source file in the desktop module I expected to see only that one module rebuilt but I see this :- Compiling 2787 files for java.desktop Note: Some input files use or override a deprecated API. Note: Recompile with

Re: RFR [9] Modular Source Code

On a related note I am scratching my head about why some files destined to be compiled into libawt or libawt_xawt go into a directory called 'common'. Eg OpenGL sources are in common but aren't common to all libs or even to all awt libs, since they would go into libawt on windows and libawt_xawt

Re: [8u20] RFR: 8038027: DTDBuilder should be run in headless mode

Looks Ok to me. -phil. On 7/17/2014 12:43 PM, David DeHaven wrote: Ping? Can a build-dev Reviewer approve this? -DrD- Please review my trivial backport of JDK-8038027. The actual change is identical to 9, the difference is the surrounding $(JAVA) is $(JAVA_SMALL) in JDK 9. JBS Issue:

Re: AWT Dev [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: Allow using the system libjpeg

BTW .. I just realised I haven't seen a bug ID in this thread. Does one already exist ? -phil. On 5/21/14 5:49 PM, Omair Majid wrote: * Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-05-21 20:23]: - Original Message - * Andrew Hughes gnu.and...@redhat.com [2014-05-21 12:22]: I'm not keen

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] AWT Dev RFR: Allow using the system libjpeg

On 05/21/2014 08:06 AM, Omair Majid wrote: I will need to push that closed generated-configure.sh afterwards however so that closed builds don't break. Anything I need to do to ensure the pushes are co-ordinated correctly? Just make sure I notice the push and I'll fix ASAP .. -phil.

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] AWT Dev RFR: Allow using the system libjpeg

I'm going to apply the patch and run it through open + closed builds cross-platforms .. -phil.. On 5/20/2014 10:15 AM, Anthony Petrov wrote: Thanks for the update, Omair. The fix looks good to me now. -- best regards, Anthony On 5/20/2014 9:11 PM, Omair Majid wrote: Hi, Updated webrevs:

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] AWT Dev RFR: Allow using the system libjpeg

-configure.sh afterwards however so that closed builds don't break. -phil. On 05/20/2014 10:18 AM, Phil Race wrote: I'm going to apply the patch and run it through open + closed builds cross-platforms .. -phil.. On 5/20/2014 10:15 AM, Anthony Petrov wrote: Thanks for the update, Omair. The fix looks

<    1   2   3   4   >