Hello, could anyone please help to take a look at this splitted patch? Thanks!
-Jonathan 2012/3/13 Jonathan Lu <[email protected]> > Hi Phil, > > Thanks a lot for the review and testing, I've splited the patch into two > parts, one for 2D repository and another for TL. Here's the patch for 2D > repository: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~**luchsh/7152519/<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eluchsh/7152519/> > > So could anybody please help to do another review? > > Thanks a lot! > > - Jonathan > > > On 03/13/2012 02:22 AM, Phil Race wrote: > >> I added two of those includes myself I believe and I doubt I did it >> unless needed >> and others apparently found it necessary too. So we need to be sure this >> is OK. >> However at least one of those I added dates back to Solaris 8 being the >> build platform >> so maybe its no longer needed. >> >> I ran the patch through our internal jprt build system on all platforms >> which >> for Solaris uses a recent Solaris 10 update and it built fine. I didn't >> notice >> any new warnings on the files I know anything about. >> >> > 7152519 >> It was incorrectly submitted as awt, I moved it to 2D. >> >> But I think you should split this into 2 patches. >> The above bug can be used for all the 2D ones and push to 2d. >> >> The other one for the nio and security patches can go to the "tl" repo. >> >> -phil. >> >> >> >> >> On 3/11/2012 8:29 PM, Jonathan Lu wrote: >> >>> Bug 7152519 has been created for this patch. >>> >>> - Jonathan >>> >>> On 03/09/2012 07:49 PM, Jonathan Lu wrote: >>> >>>> Hello 2d-dev, >>>> >>>> I find that link.h is included in several place of OpenJDK code, mostly >>>> together with dlfcn.h, but this caused portability problem in my testing on >>>> some Unix platforms, such as AIX. >>>> So far as I see OpenJDK only makes use of basic POSIX.1-2001 compatible >>>> dynamic library manipulation functions, such as dlopen, dlclose, dlsym, >>>> dlerr functions, no other extensions found, so is link.h still neccessary >>>> for current implementation? because link.h is not found in the c-POSIX >>>> standard headers >>>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**C_POSIX_library<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_POSIX_library>) >>>> and I think this removal will be an enhancement for portability, does that >>>> make sense? >>>> >>>> Here's the proposed patch, since most parts of it are from Java2d so I >>>> post it here for discussion. >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~**luchsh/remove_link_h/<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eluchsh/remove_link_h/>< >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%**7Eluchsh/remove_link_h/<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eluchsh/remove_link_h/> >>>> > >>>> >>>> And one more question, in >>>> src/solaris/native/sun/java2d/**x11/XRBackendNative.c >>>> I found following comments >>>> #ifdef __solaris__ >>>> /* Solaris 10 will not have these symbols at runtime */ >>>> #include <link.h> >>>> >>>> And in src/solaris/native/sun/awt/**fontpath.c, >>>> #include <dlfcn.h> >>>> #ifndef __linux__ /* i.e. is solaris */ >>>> #include <link.h> >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> I've built successfully on Ubuntu 11.10 32bit and OpenSolaris Express >>>> 2010.11 x86, the patch seems to be OK, but does anybody know the situation >>>> on Solaris (e.g. Solaris 10) of this problem? >>>> I assume it will also comply with POSIX.1-2001 standard, and provide >>>> all the required functions in dlfcn.h, right? >>>> >>>> Cheers! >>>> - Jonathan >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
