On 2013-05-28, at 11:27 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
>
> Possibly - but I tried for several days to come up with a build configuration
> that worked for both VS 2010 and 2012.
>
> I ran out of time for that experiment. Nice to have, but if we do not move
> to VS2012 with JDK8, we will have to wait un
On 05/28/13 07:56 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 29/05/2013 3:04 AM, David Chase wrote:
Non-progress report with VS2010 -
Tim Bell's patches, and perhaps the residual cruft from the
"uninstalled" VS2012,
don't seem to be compatible with VS2010. These look like patch
problems, not
faulty uninstal
On 29/05/2013 3:04 AM, David Chase wrote:
Non-progress report with VS2010 -
Tim Bell's patches, and perhaps the residual cruft from the "uninstalled"
VS2012,
don't seem to be compatible with VS2010. These look like patch problems, not
faulty uninstall problems, but I did need to do a by-hand r
Non-progress report with VS2010 -
Tim Bell's patches, and perhaps the residual cruft from the "uninstalled"
VS2012,
don't seem to be compatible with VS2010. These look like patch problems, not
faulty uninstall problems, but I did need to do a by-hand removal of environment
variables referencing
FYI, progress report.
No additional changes to the build, but the instructions may require tweaking.
Did manage successful builds without closed subdirectories, using VS2012 and
DirectX 2010.
Required installation+build of Freetype using instructions from Volker's blog,
adapted slightly
for up
I fully agree with this point of view.
I don't think that this conflict with the idea of a wiki companion, this
can be done and surely would be of help, but copy-paste instructions should
be with the code. I also think that since we need to keep in sync the
readme with the wiki, the problem with t
2013/5/21 6:54 -0700, gnu.and...@redhat.com:
>> On 05/21/2013 04:55 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>> I always felt that having the build instructions checked in into the
>>> repository is somewhat to heavyweight.
>>
>> There are two good reasons to do this.
>>
>> Firstly, it's a free software tradit
- Original Message -
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> > On 05/21/2013 04:55 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> >
> > > I always felt that having the build instructions checked in into the
> > > repository is somewhat to heavyweight.
> >
> > There are two good reasons to
- Original Message -
> On 05/21/2013 04:55 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>
> > I always felt that having the build instructions checked in into the
> > repository is somewhat to heavyweight.
>
> There are two good reasons to do this.
>
> Firstly, it's a free software tradition: I expect to f
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 05/21/2013 04:55 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>
> > I always felt that having the build instructions checked in into the
> > repository is somewhat to heavyweight.
>
> There are two good reasons to do this.
>
> Firstly, it's a free software t
On 05/21/2013 04:55 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> I always felt that having the build instructions checked in into the
> repository is somewhat to heavyweight.
There are two good reasons to do this.
Firstly, it's a free software tradition: I expect to find a README with
build instructions in the r
A voice from the past rings out through the forests of repositories, squirting
ancient wisdom into the clouds... ;^)
Yes, yes, I have indeed gone insane. ;^)
The intent with the README-build.html document was as a purely "OpenJDK"
document,
there should be no "Oracle specific" instructions
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 12:43 PM, David Chase wrote:
> I saw that and tried that, but it declared that "you must be Administrator
> to install this". I thought I was, I as installing all sorts of other
> software, but no go. I found your instructions, but they weren't
> Oracle-sourced instructio
I saw that and tried that, but it declared that "you must be Administrator to
install this". I thought I was, I as installing all sorts of other software,
but no go. I found your instructions, but they weren't Oracle-sourced
instructions, so it seemed like it was not my problem. This is not j
On 2013-05-21 11:44, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2013-05-19 22:58, David Chase wrote:
This is for Windows 7, following instructions, mostly vanilla.
I restarted after all the various installations.
I'm "following" the instructions at
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/raw-file/tip/README-buil
On 2013-05-19 22:58, David Chase wrote:
This is for Windows 7, following instructions, mostly vanilla.
I restarted after all the various installations.
I'm "following" the instructions at
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html
The non-vanilla step, inspired by th
As you noticed, Visual Studio Express only contains the 32-bit Compiler.
You have to download and install the "Windows SDK for Windows 7 and .NET
Framework 4" from
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=8279to get the
64-bit compiler (this will also install the IA64 cross compiler
jus
In addition, the instructions must note that if the Express compiler is used,
the 64-bit compiler is (apparently, according to configure) not provided, and
hence --with-target-bits=32 is required.
David
On 2013-05-19, at 4:58 PM, David Chase wrote:
> #3, the DirectX 9.0 link is not maybe dead, it is dead.
> The search for "DirectX 9.0 SDK Update Summer 2004" is also dead; nothing is
> found.
> Searches for "DirectX 9" yield downloads that are not SDKs, searches for
> "DirectX 9 SDK" and "Direc
This is for Windows 7, following instructions, mostly vanilla.
I restarted after all the various installations.
I'm "following" the instructions at
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html
The non-vanilla step, inspired by the cautionary warnings about paths with
spac
20 matches
Mail list logo
