AM
To: Dan Fabulich
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Anthony Petrov; Phil Race; Igor
Nekrestyanov; build-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: encumbrances update
I thought it was clear from the beginning, perhaps I wasn't making this
as well known as I should. If so, my aplogies.
It was never expected th
/www.tedneward.com
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:build-dev-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kelly O'Hair
> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 10:22 AM
> To: Dan Fabulich
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Anthony Petrov; Phil Race; Igor
> Nekrestyanov
Dan Fabulich wrote:
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
It was never expected that the initial OpenJDK source drops would be
buildable on Windows.
[...]
So that fact that it has never built on Windows was well known, I
thought.
Actually, that comes as a (small) surprise to me. When I asked about
Window
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
It was never expected that the initial OpenJDK source drops would be
buildable on Windows.
[...]
So that fact that it has never built on Windows was well known, I thought.
Actually, that comes as a (small) surprise to me. When I asked about
Windows build problems at Mar
I thought it was clear from the beginning, perhaps I wasn't making this
as well known as I should. If so, my aplogies.
It was never expected that the initial OpenJDK source drops would be buildable
on Windows. We focused on Linux and OpenSolaris and purposely left out
Windows due to the t2k issue
Hmm...
On 08/01/2007 10:58 PM Dan Fabulich wrote:
It is believed to build and work on all platform combinations : windows,
linux, solaris, 32 and 64 bit, but testing has focused on the 32 bit
versions.
"believed to build"? Has anyone yet tried doing the standard OpenJDK
build on Windows, follo
isn't building, but I'm not sure why, beyond the obvious "there's a
macro
without enough parameters" as declared on line 42)
Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
http://www.tedneward.com
CTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 9:00 PM
> To: Ted Neward
> Cc: 'Igor Nekrestyanov'; 'Dan Fabulich'; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> 'Anthony Petrov'; build-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: encumbrances update
>
> freetypecheck.c(42) : warning C4003:
; Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 9:00 PM
> To: Ted Neward
> Cc: 'Igor Nekrestyanov'; 'Dan Fabulich'; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> 'Anthony Petrov'; build-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: encumbrances update
>
> freetypecheck.c(42) : warning C4003: not enough actu
27;; 'Dan Fabulich'; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> 'Anthony Petrov'; build-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: encumbrances update
>
> freetypecheck.c(42) : warning C4003: not enough actual parameters for
> macro
> 'QUO
> TEME'
>
> Did it really prin
: Thursday, August 02, 2007 12:39 PM
To: Dan Fabulich
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Anthony Petrov; Phil Race; build-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: encumbrances update
My tests are not "ideal" for number of reasons:
2) I was using binary plugs created from my personal workspace.
I believe t
Leaving directory `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make'
Somebody have an idea what's going on here? (Obviously, freetypecheck.c
isn't building, but I'm not sure why, beyond the obvious "there's a macro
without enough parameters" as declared on line 42)
ld-dev-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Igor Nekrestyanov
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 12:39 PM
> To: Dan Fabulich
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Anthony Petrov; Phil Race; build-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: encumbrances update
>
>
> >> My tests are not "
jdk/j2se/make'
Somebody have an idea what's going on here? (Obviously, freetypecheck.c
isn't building, but I'm not sure why, beyond the obvious "there's a macro
without enough parameters" as declared on line 42)
Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teachi
My tests are not "ideal" for number of reasons:
2) I was using binary plugs created from my personal workspace.
I believe they should be the same as those to be published with
b17 code drop but this is my assumption.
We know for certain that this assumption is FALSE. No binary plug
giv
Igor Nekrestyanov wrote:
Of course i've tested these changes on all platforms including both 32
and 64 bit Windows. It is "believed to build and work" because we had
not performed full testing of openjdk binaries and we know that build
can be fragile due to different build environments.
I'm
Hi Dan,
Of course i've tested these changes on all platforms including both 32
and 64 bit Windows.
It is "believed to build and work" because we had not performed full
testing of openjdk binaries
and we know that build can be fragile due to different build environments.
My tests are not "idea
Anthony Petrov wrote:
I'm afraid that until someone tells us exactly: "I've got the following
problems with builds on Windows: this, this, and this", we can't help you at
all, can we?..
Of course you can! :-) What I'm suggesting is that someone at Sun *test*
the Windows build on their end,
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; build-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: encumbrances update
>
> Phil Race wrote:
>
> > It is believed to build and work on all platform combinations : windows,
> > linux, solaris, 32 and 64 bit, but testing has focused on the 32 bit
> > versions.
>
Phil Race wrote:
It is believed to build and work on all platform combinations : windows,
linux, solaris, 32 and 64 bit, but testing has focused on the 32 bit
versions.
"believed to build"? Has anyone yet tried doing the standard OpenJDK
build on Windows, following the directions described i
v-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Race
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 2:39 PM
> To: build-dev@openjdk.java.net; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: encumbrances update
>
>
> I just want to give a quick update on the state of one the 2D encumbrances
> to a broader audience than t
I just want to give a quick update on the state of one the 2D encumbrances
to a broader audience than the 2D and font mailing lists, since the
state of encumbrances are generally of broad interest.
Igor Nekrestyanov just put back into what will be b17 the first version of the
code that replaces
22 matches
Mail list logo
