Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] AARCH64: RFR (XS) 8068927: AARCH64: better handling of aarch64- triples (was RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes)

On 1/15/2015 5:41 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-15 00:34, Dean Long wrote: Can I get a review for this? https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068927 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlong/8068927/webrev/ Looks good to me. (However, I'm not a formal reviewer for the aarch64-port pro

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2015-01-14 23:02, Dean Long wrote: On 1/14/2015 5:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-13 09:32, Dean Long wrote: On 1/12/2015 3:49 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-12 05:31, Dean Long wrote: I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash sh

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] AARCH64: RFR (XS) 8068927: AARCH64: better handling of aarch64- triples (was RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes)

On 2015-01-15 00:34, Dean Long wrote: Can I get a review for this? https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068927 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlong/8068927/webrev/ Looks good to me. (However, I'm not a formal reviewer for the aarch64-port project) /Magnus

AARCH64: RFR (XS) 8068927: AARCH64: better handling of aarch64- triples (was RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes)

Can I get a review for this? https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068927 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlong/8068927/webrev/ thanks, dl On 1/13/2015 10:56 AM, Dean Long wrote: On 1/13/2015 1:08 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 13/01/15 08:44, Dean Long wrote: I came up with a simpler version,

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 1/14/2015 5:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-13 09:32, Dean Long wrote: On 1/12/2015 3:49 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-12 05:31, Dean Long wrote: I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash shell but not with the dash shell. The p

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2015-01-13 09:32, Dean Long wrote: On 1/12/2015 3:49 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-12 05:31, Dean Long wrote: I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash shell but not with the dash shell. The problem seems to be with this line: result=`.

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 1/13/2015 1:08 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 13/01/15 08:44, Dean Long wrote: I came up with a simpler version, where I replace "aarch64-" with "arm-", run autoconf-config.sub, then replace "arm-" back to "aarch64-". Thanks. That sounds good to me. Andrew. Here's the patch. If it looks go

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 13/01/15 08:44, Dean Long wrote: > I came up with a simpler version, where I replace "aarch64-" with > "arm-", run autoconf-config.sub, then replace "arm-" back to > "aarch64-". Thanks. That sounds good to me. Andrew.

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 1/12/2015 2:25 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 12/01/15 04:31, Dean Long wrote: I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash shell but not with the dash shell. The problem seems to be with this line: result=`. $DIR/autoconf-config.sub $sub_args "$@"` "da

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 1/12/2015 3:49 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2015-01-12 05:31, Dean Long wrote: I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash shell but not with the dash shell. The problem seems to be with this line: result=`. $DIR/autoconf-config.sub $sub_args "$@

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2015-01-12 05:31, Dean Long wrote: I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash shell but not with the dash shell. The problem seems to be with this line: result=`. $DIR/autoconf-config.sub $sub_args "$@"` "dash" doesn't seem to support args passed wi

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 12/01/15 04:31, Dean Long wrote: > I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with > the bash shell but not with the dash shell. > The problem seems to be with this line: > > result=`. $DIR/autoconf-config.sub $sub_args "$@"` > > "dash" doesn't seem to support arg

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

I found a small problem with the new config.sub wrapper. It works with the bash shell but not with the dash shell. The problem seems to be with this line: result=`. $DIR/autoconf-config.sub $sub_args "$@"` "dash" doesn't seem to support args passed with ".", so $sub_args "$@" are ignored.

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/07/2014 12:19 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/07/2014 06:10 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: The first patch: top-level build machinery ch

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 19, 2014, at 12:56 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > > On 2014-11-18 19:09, Christian Thalinger wrote: >>> On Nov 18, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 2014-11-18 01:59, Christian Thalinger wrote: > On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrot

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-18 19:09, Christian Thalinger wrote: On Nov 18, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-11-18 01:59, Christian Thalinger wrote: On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-11-14 21:44, Dean Long wrote: The distribution exception is there exactly

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 18, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > On 2014-11-18 01:59, Christian Thalinger wrote: >>> On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 2014-11-14 21:44, Dean Long wrote: > The distribution exception is there exactly since anyone should be

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-18 01:59, Christian Thalinger wrote: On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-11-14 21:44, Dean Long wrote: The distribution exception is there exactly since anyone should be able to distribute the files with their configure script. That does not mean that yo

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/17/2014 4:59 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-11-14 21:44, Dean Long wrote: The distribution exception is there exactly since anyone should be able to distribute the files with their configure script. That does not mean that

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 17, 2014, at 4:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > On 2014-11-14 21:44, Dean Long wrote: >> >>> >>> The distribution exception is there exactly since anyone should be able to >>> distribute the files with their configure script. That does not mean that >>> you are allowed to edi

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-14 21:44, Dean Long wrote: The distribution exception is there exactly since anyone should be able to distribute the files with their configure script. That does not mean that you are allowed to edit it, though. What if we require Autoconf to be installed on the host? Does that

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/14/2014 12:39 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: 13 nov 2014 kl. 19:33 skrev Christian Thalinger : On Nov 13, 2014, at 6:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2014-11-10 11:32, Volker Simonis wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2014-11-10 10:27, Volker Simoni

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> 13 nov 2014 kl. 19:33 skrev Christian Thalinger > : > > >> On Nov 13, 2014, at 6:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie >> wrote: >> >>> On 2014-11-10 11:32, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Erik Joelsson >>> wrote: On 2014-11-10 10:27, Volker Simonis wrote: > On Mo

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 13, 2014, at 6:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > On 2014-11-10 11:32, Volker Simonis wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Erik Joelsson >> wrote: >>> On 2014-11-10 10:27, Volker Simonis wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Hello, >>

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/13/2014 03:00 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > > hg mv config.sub autoconf-config.sub > hg cp config.guess config.sub > > and then fix config.sub so that it runs autoconf-config.sub and modifies > the output to what you expect it to be from config.sub when running on > this particular plat

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-13 15:28, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/13/2014 02:09 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: From my IANAL point of view, this exception should be enough to disregard if the file is also distributed under GPL2 or GPL3. Unfortunately, as Erik says, our lawyers are apprehensive of GLP3. So while w

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/13/2014 02:12 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > I was a bit surprised to see that VAR_CPU_ARCH is set to "aarch64" and > not "arm". The meaning of the CPU_ARCH variable is supposed to cover > platforms with similar architecture, regardless of address size. But > maybe I'm just too unfamiliar

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/13/2014 02:09 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > From my IANAL point of view, this exception should be enough to > disregard if the file is also distributed under GPL2 or GPL3. > Unfortunately, as Erik says, our lawyers are apprehensive of GLP3. So > while we thought that we could be able to

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-07 18:34, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: CCing to build-dev and JDK9-dev since it is top level changes. Note, it will go into staging aarch64 repo. Vladimir On 11/7/14 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: The first patch: top-level build machinery changes. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8064357-

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-10 11:32, Volker Simonis wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2014-11-10 10:27, Volker Simonis wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, I would certainly like to have these files updated, but unfortunately the license on thes

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-10 18:45, Omair Majid wrote: * Christian Thalinger [2014-11-07 13:11]: On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: common/autoconf/flags.m4 +aarch64) + ZERO_ARCHFLAG="" + ;; Why is this required on aarch64 but n

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

* Christian Thalinger [2014-11-07 13:11]: > > On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: > >> common/autoconf/flags.m4 > >> > >> +aarch64) > >> + ZERO_ARCHFLAG="" > >> + ;; > >> > >> Why is this required on aarch64 but no

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > On 2014-11-10 10:27, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Erik Joelsson >> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I would certainly like to have these files updated, but unfortunately the >>> license on these files changed

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 2014-11-10 10:27, Volker Simonis wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, I would certainly like to have these files updated, but unfortunately the license on these files changed from GPL2 to GPL3. This essentially means that the switch is non trivial from a lega

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Hello, > > I would certainly like to have these files updated, but unfortunately the > license on these files changed from GPL2 to GPL3. This essentially means > that the switch is non trivial from a legal perspective and the impression > I'v

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 10/11/14 08:08, Erik Joelsson wrote: > I would certainly like to have these files updated, but > unfortunately the license on these files changed from GPL2 to > GPL3. This essentially means that the switch is non trivial from a > legal perspective and the impression I've received when I last >

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

Hello, I would certainly like to have these files updated, but unfortunately the license on these files changed from GPL2 to GPL3. This essentially means that the switch is non trivial from a legal perspective and the impression I've received when I last inquired about updating these files wa

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/07/2014 06:00 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: > 3. pull in the new version of config.guess and config.sub from [1] > which already seem to have the changes you need. > > I'm all in favour of point three which would also allow us to get rid > of some of the hacks which are currently in config.guess

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 7, 2014, at 10:19 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 11/07/2014 06:10 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: >> >>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> >>> On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: > On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > >

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 7, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Christian Thalinger > wrote: > >> >> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: >>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: The first patch: top-level build machinery change

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/07/2014 06:10 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: > >> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: >>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: The first patch: top-level build machinery changes. http:/

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: >> >>> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> >>> The first patch: top-level build machinery changes. >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8064357-rev-1/ >>>

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

The changes look good besides the ones to common/autoconf/build-aux/config.sub When we did our initial check-in there have been objections to modify autoconf-config.guess because that one was "copied directly from the autoconf project and should not be modified". I think the same applies to config

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

On 11/07/2014 05:42 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote: > >> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> The first patch: top-level build machinery changes. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8064357-rev-1/ >> > > common/autoconf/flags

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

> On Nov 7, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > The first patch: top-level build machinery changes. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8064357-rev-1/ > common/autoconf/flags.m4 +aarch64) + ZERO_ARCHFLAG="" + ;; Why is

Re: RFR: AARCH64: Top-level JDK changes

CCing to build-dev and JDK9-dev since it is top level changes. Note, it will go into staging aarch64 repo. Vladimir On 11/7/14 9:21 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: The first patch: top-level build machinery changes. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8064357-rev-1/ Andrew.