Hi Felix,
Because I need to backport the fix of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-5249 to Groovy 1.7.5, and I
have to build it myself.
But before that happens, I want to make sure my procedure of rebuilding
the jar is absolutely correct, so I start with unmodified source and am
trying to output the same binaries, except the
"__timeStamp__239_neverHappen" timestamp and the manifest files and so.
Ken Lam
System Analyst
Mobigator Technology Group
http://www.mobigator.com
T: +852.2524.9000, ext 114
F: +852.2524.9050
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Need to get help: Building Groovy 1.7.5 from source gives
encoding error for ReadLineTest.groovy
From: Felix Dorner <felix.dor...@gmail.com>
To: users@groovy.apache.org
Date: 8/2/2018 19:39
Ken, maybe I missed something obvious and sound stupid now, but anyway
so here it comes: If you want to have the same binaries as the
official binaries, why don't you just use the official binaries?
On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Ken Lam <ken....@mobigator.com
<mailto:ken....@mobigator.com>> wrote:
Dear Groovy developers,
After experimenting with many JDK versions, I found that JDK 6
Update 13 and 21 to be able to build the jar with the least
difference from the official groovy-all-1.7.5.jar distributed in
grails 1.3.5.
But I still want to know whether the difference in the binary
.class files will have impact to my system.
Attached are the samples and summary of "how different" the jar
built by me is from the official groovy-all-1.7.5.jar
JDK 6 Update 13: 190 binary files different from official version
JDK 6 Update 21: 198 binary files different from official version
Apart from the "__timeStamp__239_neverHappen" timestamp in the
.class files, there are still some other differences, and I want
to know why they are here.
I understand this is a lot to ask, but I have no choice because I
don't know how to analyze the bytecode differences and their
meanings. So I have attached some samples and I hope if you can
teach me some basic knowledge and some references to look at, I
will be able to handle it myself in the future.
Regards,
Ken Lam
System Analyst
Mobigator Technology Group
http://www.mobigator.com
T: +852.2524.9000, ext 114 <tel:%2B852.2524.9000%2C%20ext%20114>
F: +852.2524.9050 <tel:%2B852.2524.9050>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Need to get help: Building Groovy 1.7.5 from source
gives encoding error for ReadLineTest.groovy
From: Ken Lam <ken....@mobigator.com <mailto:ken....@mobigator.com>>
To: users@groovy.apache.org <mailto:users@groovy.apache.org>,
Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org <mailto:blackd...@gmx.org>>
Date: 8/2/2018 11:18
Dear Jochen,
More info I found from MANIFEST.MF:
I found that the official groovy-all-1.7.5.jar distributed in
grails 1.3.5 was built with JDK 1.7.0-ea (Sun Microsystems
Inc.). I guess the "ea" means early access version. So I don't
believe I could ever use the exactly same JDK to compile the
groovy source. How am I supposed to find an early access version?
Anyway, this is a less important question. As mentioned in
previous email, I mainly want to know whether it's expected or
required, to compile binary .class files which are identical
to the officially distributed ones, when we try to rebuild
groovy on our own.
Regards,
Ken Lam
System Analyst
Mobigator Technology Group
http://www.mobigator.com
T: +852.2524.9000, ext 114 <tel:%2B852.2524.9000%2C%20ext%20114>
F: +852.2524.9050 <tel:%2B852.2524.9050>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Need to get help: Building Groovy 1.7.5 from
source gives encoding error for ReadLineTest.groovy
From: Ken Lam <ken....@mobigator.com
<mailto:ken....@mobigator.com>>
To: users@groovy.apache.org <mailto:users@groovy.apache.org>,
Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org <mailto:blackd...@gmx.org>>
Date: 8/2/2018 11:12
Dear Jochen,
Also, after compiling the groovy-all-1.7.5.jar, I
extracted the jar, and extracted the official jar
distributed in grails 1.3.5, and compare between the two
extracted folders.
Out of 3371 files, 256 files (254 binary files + 2 text
files) are different, and the rest are identical.
For the 2 different text files, I have checked and they
should be ok.
For the 254 binary files, however, I am not sure whether
this is normal.
Of course, I haven't modified any source codes at all. At
least not yet.
My question is:
Is it expected or required, to have exact binary .class
files compiled when we try to rebuild groovy? My compiled
jar does have nearly 3000 binary class files being
identical to the those in the official jar, only 254
binary files are different.
Regards,
Ken Lam
System Analyst
Mobigator Technology Group
http://www.mobigator.com
T: +852.2524.9000, ext 114
<tel:%2B852.2524.9000%2C%20ext%20114>
F: +852.2524.9050 <tel:%2B852.2524.9050>
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Need to get help: Building Groovy 1.7.5 from
source gives encoding error for ReadLineTest.groovy
From: Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org
<mailto:blackd...@gmx.org>>
To: users@groovy.apache.org <mailto:users@groovy.apache.org>
Date: 8/2/2018 4:11
On 07.02.2018 07:12, Ken Lam wrote:
Dear Jochen,
Then why do I have to set
encoding="utf-8"
in groovyc commands in the build.xml to force it
to UTF-8,
If no encoding is set, the system encoding is used and
that could be for example GB2312 or Big5 or even only
ASCII
while the official source distribution can omit
this and the Groovy developers can still compile
the source of Groovy 1.7.5 correctly?
because we work on linux and mac systems. I am using
UTF8 as system default for over 10 years now.
Which settings in the system am I missing?
On Windows? sorry, cannot help here really. Windows is
not know to be friendly to such changes at all.
bye Jochen
--
Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
