Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread 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 assume they must really, really want the

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread Andrew John Hughes
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

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread Dalibor Topic
Tim Bell wrote: > Review feedback convinced me to reverse that last statement. > > Here is round two - please take a look: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tbell/6819847/webrev.01/ > > With these changes the default behavior is as if IMPORT_BINARY_PLUGS=false Thanks Tim, the change looks good

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread Tim Bell
I wrote: The other case is if a user outside the Sun network sets IMPORT_BINARY_PLUGS=true. Here they will need to set one of the ALT_..._BINARY_PLUGS variables to point to the plugs anyway. Andrew John Hughes wrote: That suggests to me that outside Sun, there is no need for IMPORT_BINARY_P

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread 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, ALT_BUILD_BINARY_PLUGS_PATH, ALT_CLOSED_JDK_IMPORT_PATH (See the comments in jdk/make/common/Defs.gmk starting at line 127), sho

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread Andrew John Hughes
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, ALT_BUILD_BINARY_PLUGS_PATH, ALT_CLOSED_JDK_IMPORT_PATH (See the commen

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread Xiomara . Jayasena
Thumbs down -- sorry Tim, this fix breaks the product build. -Xiomara On 03/31/09 13:26, Tim Bell wrote: 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

Re: Round two Re: Please review fix for 6819847 [Re: [Fwd: Problems with building jmx for OpenJDK.]]

2009-03-31 Thread Tim Bell
xiomara.jayas...@sun.com wrote: Thumbs down -- sorry Tim, this fix breaks the product build. Indeed it did. Sigh. I am working on a fix under bug-ID 6824595 "OpenJDK fix breaks product build for jdk7". No wonder everyone is afraid to touch these Makefiles. My build checklist just got twi