On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie
wrote:
> On 2015-05-20 11:50, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm a little confused about this change. I finally found some time to
>> look at it, because it makes most of our nightly jdk9/dev builds fail.
>> Now I've looked at the 'simples
On 2015-05-20 11:50, Volker Simonis wrote:
Hi,
I'm a little confused about this change. I finally found some time to
look at it, because it makes most of our nightly jdk9/dev builds fail.
Now I've looked at the 'simplest possible failure' which happens on
linux/amd64. The failure is the followin
Hi Volker,
On 20/05/2015 7:50 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
Hi,
I'm a little confused about this change. I finally found some time to
look at it, because it makes most of our nightly jdk9/dev builds fail.
Now I've looked at the 'simplest possible failure' which happens on
linux/amd64. The failure i
Hi,
I'm a little confused about this change. I finally found some time to
look at it, because it makes most of our nightly jdk9/dev builds fail.
Now I've looked at the 'simplest possible failure' which happens on
linux/amd64. The failure is the following:
/net/usr.work/openjdk/nb/linuxx86_64/nigh
Magnus:
Looks good to me as well.
Tim
On 05/08/15 01:32, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Looks good.
/Erik
On 2015-05-08 09:57, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-04-20 09:02, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Looks good to me.
Thanks Erik.
Unfortunately, I never got round to pushing this. In the meantime,
the
Looks good.
/Erik
On 2015-05-08 09:57, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-04-20 09:02, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Looks good to me.
Thanks Erik.
Unfortunately, I never got round to pushing this. In the meantime, the
codebase evolved, and I had to add a couple of more disabled warnings.
I also mod
On 2015-04-20 09:02, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Looks good to me.
Thanks Erik.
Unfortunately, I never got round to pushing this. In the meantime, the
codebase evolved, and I had to add a couple of more disabled warnings. I
also modified the help text on a failed build slightly.
Here's the updated
Looks good to me.
/Erik
On 2015-04-17 14:52, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
With JDK-8074096, the number of warnings in the product was reduced to
a minimum. This enables the next step, which is turning on the
respective compiler flags that turns warnings into errors. In the long
run, this is the
With JDK-8074096, the number of warnings in the product was reduced to a
minimum. This enables the next step, which is turning on the respective
compiler flags that turns warnings into errors. In the long run, this is
the only way to keep the warnings from creeping back.
Even with JDK-8074096,
