I didn't say otherwise. But turns out Paul isn't talking about the OS X
porting
project forest anyway .. he's referring to the 7ux forest, and there it
does not.
-phil.
On 10/25/2011 2:14 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
Phil,
Though, the X11 toolkit still builds and runs ok...
- Michael.
On 25/
Phil,
Though, the X11 toolkit still builds and runs ok...
- Michael.
On 25/10/11 20:46, Phil Race wrote:
Paul,
Just so you know, OpenJDK on OS X doesn't use X11.
Earlier that's all there was but now that's obsolete and its based on
Cocoa APIs.
-phil.
On 10/19/11 12:27 PM, Paul Hohensee wr
The idea is that it's an interim state where at least the core libs
group can do
work before the client work is integrated. jdk7u-osx is mean to be the
forest
that hosts the "real" work because the macosx-port forest can't be stretched
to fit. If there's somehow a way to turn the macosx-port f
So someone will make all the necessary OS X source and build changes in
this new
7ux forest to build something that if it runs at all, certainly won't
run client apps ?
It might be enough for running the non-client tests but it seems like
that's the
kind of dead end changes that are better made
Yes, I think we knew that. What I was proposing was an interim state of
jdk7u-osx (call it the Oracle forest: jdk7u-osx is quite a mouthful) where
we could build testable bundles on osx before the client work is integrated.
Paul
On 10/25/11 3:46 PM, Phil Race wrote:
Paul,
Just so you know, Op
Paul,
Just so you know, OpenJDK on OS X doesn't use X11.
Earlier that's all there was but now that's obsolete and its based on
Cocoa APIs.
-phil.
On 10/19/11 12:27 PM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
On 10/17/11 4:20 PM, Henri Gomez wrote:
What does it means for osx builder like me ?
This is what I
On 10/17/11 4:20 PM, Henri Gomez wrote:
What does it means for osx builder like me ?
This is what I expect, actual process may vary a bit.
The forest is a development forest, so while you ought to be able to
build it at any given time, it's not necessarily completely stable (i.e.,
may not pass
What does it means for osx builder like me ?
When could we try to use it for OS/X builds ?
2011/10/17 Paul Hohensee :
> Thanks, Dalibor.
>
> The forest is here
>
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-osx/
>
> and the corresponding gates here
>
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-osx-gate/
Thanks, Dalibor.
The forest is here
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-osx/
and the corresponding gates here
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-osx-gate/
The jdk7u-osx forest is a clone of jdk7u/jdk7u-dev and has the same jcheck
constraints as jdk7u-dev (i.e., duplicate bugids are all
On 10/6/11 6:37 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
> On 10/6/11 8:16 AM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
>> At JavaOne, Oracle announced the developer preview of the JDK7 Mac OSX
>> port. Apple is open-sourcing the port and Oracle plans to deliver it in
>> a future JDK7 update release. Since the initial port will use
See below.
On 10/10/11 3:38 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 07:42 Mon 10 Oct , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
My concern with this speeding up of the delivery of the Mac changes into jdk7u
is that the jdk7u
and jdk8 repositories were related at one point in time, but are no longer
directly relat
On 07:42 Mon 10 Oct , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>
> My concern with this speeding up of the delivery of the Mac changes into
> jdk7u is that the jdk7u
> and jdk8 repositories were related at one point in time, but are no longer
> directly related.
> You cannot pull or push changesets back and fort
My concern with this speeding up of the delivery of the Mac changes into jdk7u
is that the jdk7u
and jdk8 repositories were related at one point in time, but are no longer
directly related.
You cannot pull or push changesets back and forth between jdk8 and jdk7u
repositories, you can
only trans
Inline:
On 10/7/11 5:11 PM, Phil Race wrote:
Hi Paul,
A few comments ..
On 10/7/2011 1:36 PM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
The ideas are:
1. In the interest of delivery speed, we want the OSX port to go into
the 7
update train and get forward-ported to 8 from there. At the moment,
there's not much
Hi Paul,
A few comments ..
On 10/7/2011 1:36 PM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
The ideas are:
1. In the interest of delivery speed, we want the OSX port to go into
the 7
update train and get forward-ported to 8 from there. At the moment,
there's not much difference between 7u and 8, so for at least t
The ideas are:
1. In the interest of delivery speed, we want the OSX port to go into the 7
update train and get forward-ported to 8 from there. At the moment,
there's not much difference between 7u and 8, so for at least the initial
work a forward port should be not very difficult.
2. The propo
I think there's a while to figure out what makes sense as the "stable
port" will take
a while to come about but someone needs to figure out what gets us where we
want to be, so I wouldn't rush the implementation ..
Anyway, on openjdk we currently have
1. macos-porting project
2. 7u-dev
3. jdk8
On 10/6/11 8:16 AM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
> At JavaOne, Oracle announced the developer preview of the JDK7 Mac OSX
> port. Apple is open-sourcing the port and Oracle plans to deliver it in
> a future JDK7 update release. Since the initial port will use the JDK7 code
> base, I'd like to propose the
At JavaOne, Oracle announced the developer preview of the JDK7 Mac OSX
port. Apple is open-sourcing the port and Oracle plans to deliver it in
a future JDK7 update release. Since the initial port will use the JDK7
code
base, I'd like to propose the creation of a project repo forest for the por
19 matches
Mail list logo
