Hi Thomas,
On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 17:26 +0100, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> thanks for your help.
>
> I think the reason is the combination of zero+slowdebug and the fact that
> we run our own binaries during build (at least this is true for jmod).
>
> I am building on Ubuntu 16.4, "normal
On 22/11/17 17:09, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> There is a configure option:
>
> --with-build-jdk path to JDK of same version as is being built[the
> newly built JDK]
>
> If set, this jdk is used instead of the newly built jdk for any tool
> that needs to run, lik
I’m trying to build JDK8 on a brand-new Ubuntu VM. Fresh forest, fresh
dependency setup, the works.
When I run it, there’s a problem about OS version detection, which I found a
fix for, but then it appears that there’s some kind of syntax error in a
generate makefile. Before I attach a ridic
Hi Ted!
On 11/23/2017 11:23 AM, Ted Neward wrote:
When I run it, there’s a problem about OS version detection, which I found a fix
for, but then it appears that there’s some kind of syntax error in a generate
makefile.
Before I attach a ridiculously long logfile, does anybody have a quick fix o
Yeah, I’ve got build-dep and openjdk-8. I’ll have a look at the source, but
this begs a question: Why hasn’t it been backported to the JDK8 repo, if it’s a
known fix?
Ted Neward
Author, Speaker, Mentor
http://www.newardassociates.com
t: @tedneward | m: (425) 647-4526
On 11/23/17, 2:32 AM, "John
You're not trying to build jdk8/jdk8 instead of jdk8u/jdk8u, right?
cheers,
dalibor topic
On 23.11.2017 11:50, Ted Neward wrote:
Yeah, I’ve got build-dep and openjdk-8. I’ll have a look at the source, but
this begs a question: Why hasn’t it been backported to the JDK8 repo, if it’s a
known fi
Errr….. What’s the difference, again?
I cloned java.net/jdk8/jdk8, which is what I thought was the correct repo—is
there a new URL? I haven’t done this in a while, so I jumped onto Google and
took the first URL in a description that seemed correct. Am I trying to clone
the wrong repo?
Ted Newa
Probably - jdk8/jdk8 is the GA source code from a few years ago.
jdk8u/jdk8u is the latest JDK 8 updates.
cheers,
dalibor topic
On 23.11.2017 12:12, Ted Neward wrote:
Errr….. What’s the difference, again?
I cloned java.net/jdk8/jdk8, which is what I thought was the correct repo—is
there a ne
Save me a Google and remind me where that repo URL is? :-)
Ted Neward
Author, Speaker, Mentor
http://www.newardassociates.com
t: @tedneward | m: (425) 647-4526
On 11/23/17, 3:14 AM, "dalibor topic" wrote:
Probably - jdk8/jdk8 is the GA source code from a few years ago.
jdk8u/jdk8u is t
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Severin Gehwolf
wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Wed, 2017-11-22 at 17:26 +0100, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > thanks for your help.
> >
> > I think the reason is the combination of zero+slowdebug and the fact that
> > we run our own binaries during build (a
Oh, one other more general question: Has anybody built OpenJDK successfully
using Ubuntu Server? (I just need a quick build VM, I don’t necessarily need
all the GUI bells and whistles, in many/most cases.)
I know AdoptOpenJDK has a Docker image, too, but I’m not sure how to use it and
sort of g
hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/ and then bash
get_source.sh within jdk8u directory.
cheers,
dalibor topic
On 23.11.2017 12:15, Ted Neward wrote:
Save me a Google and remind me where that repo URL is? :-)
Ted Neward
Author, Speaker, Mentor
http://www.newardassociates.com
t: @t
OK, so it’s still at java.net; that’s good to know. :-)
Out of curiosity, though, what’s the difference? Why maintain two?
Ted Neward
Author, Speaker, Mentor
http://www.newardassociates.com
t: @tedneward | m: (425) 647-4526
On 11/23/17, 3:21 AM, "dalibor topic" wrote:
hg clone http://hg.op
On 23/11/17 11:25, Ted Neward wrote:
> OK, so it’s still at java.net; that’s good to know. :-)
>
> Out of curiosity, though, what’s the difference? Why maintain two?
The old one is not maintained. However, it is the reference
implementation of JDK 8 and -- like the laws of the Medes and Persians
On 23.11.2017 12:25, Ted Neward wrote:
OK, so it’s still at java.net; that’s good to know. :-)
Out of curiosity, though, what’s the difference? Why maintain two?
jdk8/jdk8 is the 'historic' source code 'archive' for the development of
JDK 8. JDK 8u is what happened since in the updates.
J
That is just Byzantine enough to be true. :-)
I had a feeling the answer was going to be something along the lines of
“Reasons—and backwards compatibility reasons” or so, and that pretty neatly
fits into that category, so…. Got it. :-)
Thanks! Downloading source now and trying again. (I knew it
See https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/Build/Supported+Build+Platforms
Other JDK 8 build platforms
Linux x86 and x86_64(green star)Ubuntu 14.04gcc 4.8.2 Works
flawlessly
(green star)Ubuntu 13.10gcc 4.8.1 Works flawlessly
Ubuntu Server seems to be 16.
Hi Ted!
On 11/23/2017 11:50 AM, Ted Neward wrote:
Yeah, I’ve got build-dep and openjdk-8. I’ll have a look at the source,
but this begs a question: Why hasn’t it been backported to the JDK8 repo,
if it’s a known fix?
I have upstreamed many Debian-related fixes to OpenJDK but they are so far
on
On 23/11/17 12:10, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> I have upstreamed many Debian-related fixes to OpenJDK but they are so far
> only part of OpenJDK-10. I haven't done any backports to OpenJDK yet, but
> I might start doing this with OpenJDK-9 in the near future.
Are these specifically Debian-r
On 11/23/2017 01:15 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 23/11/17 12:10, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
I have upstreamed many Debian-related fixes to OpenJDK but they are so far
only part of OpenJDK-10. I haven't done any backports to OpenJDK yet, but
I might start doing this with OpenJDK-9 in the near
It turned out that macos bundles does not work correctly with external,
non-zipped debug symbols. :-( This has probably never been tested
before. This additional patch is also needed:
diff --git a/make/Bundles.gmk b/make/Bundles.gmk
--- a/make/Bundles.gmk
+++ b/make/Bundles.gmk
@@ -177,7 +177,7
Hi,
I am trying to build the client variant, but it fails with the output
below. Is this a known issue or is there any specific configure option I
should use ?
Thanks,
Mete
Compiling 4 files for BUILD_JIGSAW_TOOLS
Error: missing `server' JVM at
`/home/ubuntu/jdk9u/build/linux-x86_64-normal-clie
The test selection and component calculation for jtreg tests have been
broken since the consolidated and restructured forest.
This fix will restore component calculation (which solves issues with
incorrect component-specific settings, such as nativepath). It also
allows for a more flexible tes
I'm pretty sure it has worked at some point because I wrote that dSYM
logic and must have tested it locally at least, but it does seem weird.
Anyway, fix looks good, given that you have actually tried it and
checked the bundle contents. (no dSYM in jdk/jre, and all of them in the
symbols bundle
Hello Mete,
The options to chose which jvm to build was never completely dynamic
like that unfortunately. The jvm.cfg file is still assuming only a few
specific combinations. A build of client only has never been an official
combination so unfortunately fails. It's really too bad because it
s
Looks good, except for the indentation of the value for $1_COMPONENT.
It's really a shame that you can't add comments inside the big blocks of
functional logic. It sure would help in understanding what each sub
block was trying to achieve.
/Erik
On 2017-11-23 06:20, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:40 AM, Lussier, Denis wrote:
> This is good stuff. Back in 2010 I got OpenJDK compiled and running on the
> Microsoft Toolchain. I never ran the jtreg tests, but, the binaries
> worked for running basic Tomcat but definitely not for trying to run
> Eclipse.
>
> These
27 matches
Mail list logo
