I don't think JDK engineers do "make clean" very much. They either do "make clobber", or the crude yet effective
rm -rf ../build; make ... Martin Ted Neward wrote: > Quick note: doing a "make clean" from the top yielded this: > > $ make clean > rm -f -r c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~1/hotspot/outputdir > rm -f -r c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~1/hotspot/import > ( cd ../../j2se/make; make clobber EXTERNALSANITYCONTROL=true > MILESTONE=private > BUILD_NUMBER=b00 JDK_BUILD_NUMBER=b00 FULL_VERSION=1.7.0-private-b00 > ALT_OUTPUT > DIR=c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~1 > ALT_HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PATH=c:/Prg > /OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~1/hotspot/import BUILD_HOTSPOT=true > BUILD_ > MOTIF=false ARCH_DATA_MODEL=32 ; ) > make[1]: Entering directory `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make' > ../make/common/shared/Defs-windows.gmk:611: "WARNING: Value of > HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PA > TH cannot be empty, check or set ALT_HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PATH" > rm -f -r c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~1 > rm: cannot remove directory `c:/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/build/WINDOW~1': > Dir > ectory not empty > make[1]: *** [clobber] Error 1 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make' > make: *** [j2se-clobber] Error 2 > CYGWIN:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/control/make > $ > > Not sure if there was something in particular I needed to do to make the > clean target work, but I "fixed" it by just nuking the build/* directories > by hand. However, this doesn't exactly work, as apparently "make clean" > *creates* directories underneath build (build/windows-i586, in particular) > as part of cleaning the build. :-) > > I suspect this to be a bug, yes? > > Ted Neward > Java, .NET, XML Services > Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing > http://www.tedneward.com > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 2:15 PM >>To: Ted Neward >>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; build-dev@openjdk.java.net >>Subject: Re: T2K needed in Linux, also? >> >>The new sparse binary plugs will have the same exact layout as a jdk >>install >>tree, e.g. bin, lib, jre, jre/lib, jre/bin, etc. >>With one additional directory called "libfiles". This is where t2k.lib >>will be found, >>however, look quickly, because it may be deleted from the binary plugs >>soon >>and won't even be needed anymore. So anything you do around t2k.lib may be >>a bit >>of a waste of time. The new sparse binary plugs are awaiting some legal >>issues >>and should be showing up any day now. >> >>The j2se/make/common/BinaryPlugs.gmk file has the rules for dealing with >>the >>binary plugs and has a rule that will copy the t2k.lib file into the right >>place when the make/sun/font/Makefile is run. There is an export and >>import >>process for the BinaryPlugs. As the different engineering groups remove >>the need for plugs, this file should get smaller and smaller, as will the >>size of the binary plugs which will be created automatically soon. >> >>Unfortunately we suspect there is a missing 'mkdir' in BinaryPlugs.gmk >>right >>now: >> >>------- BinaryPlugs.gmk ------- >>*** /tmp/sccs.SHa4YR Sat Jul 28 13:57:44 2007 >>--- BinaryPlugs.gmk Sat Jul 28 13:57:37 2007 >>*************** >>*** 448,453 **** >>--- 448,454 ---- >> import-binary-plug-t2k-library: \ >> $(LIBFILES_DIR)/t2k.lib $(LIB_LOCATION)/$(PLUG_T2K_LIBRARY) >> $(RM) $(OBJDIR)/t2k.lib >>+ $(MKDIR) -p $(OBJDIR) >> $(CP) $(LIBFILES_DIR)/t2k.lib $(OBJDIR) >> else # !windows >> import-binary-plug-t2k-library: \ >> >>At least that's what we think prevents the new sparse binary plug bundles >>from allowing an OpenJDK build on windows to work right now. >>We were testing windows builds last week just before I took off on a >>short vacation. >>You could simulate things by creating this "libfiles" directory and >>placing >>your t2k.lib file in it. >> >>As far as debugging the build process, it's not easy, but it has been >>getting better over the last few releases. >>Expect more build changes in the future with a goal of simplification. >> >>Try 'gnumake -p', or there was a recent article in Dr. Dobbs about >>debugging >>makefiles that was very helpful. Last month maybe or 2 months ago? >> >>-kto >> >> >>Ted Neward wrote: >>>Next issue: after an svn update (which caught me up to rev 244, the >>latest >>>in SVN), I do a Windows build, and it fails in the j2se/make/sun/font >>build, >>>trying (of course) to build t2k.lib. The problem is, I can't figure out >>what >>>it's looking for in order to slip t2k.lib into the right place and move >>on. >>>Here's the results: >>> >>>CYGWIN:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make/sun/font >>>$ make >>>/usr/bin/echo -e "lib=" ../../../build/windows-i586/bin/fontmanager.dll >>>lib= ../../../build/windows-i586/bin/fontmanager.dll >>>make -C t2k >>>make[1]: Entering directory >>>`/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make/sun/font/t2k' >>>make[1]: *** No rule to make target >>>`C:/Prg/OpenJDK/BinaryPlugs/jdk1.7.0/libfiles/t2k.lib', needed by >>>`../../../../build/windows-i586/libfiles/t2k.lib'. Stop. >>>make[1]: Leaving directory >>>`/cygdrive/c/Prg/OpenJDK/openjdk/j2se/make/sun/font/t2k' >>>make: *** [t2k] Error 2 >>> >>>Where did this directory "libfiles" come from in the build step? My >>guess is >>>it's coming from a variable/setting somewhere, but I can't figure out >>what >>>to set in order to help the build system find my cribbed t2k.lib so it >>can >>>move on. And even if I create said directories (both in the BinaryPlugs >>dir >>>and the build dir), and put t2k.lib in there, the build still fails. >>> >>>Help? >>> >>>BTW, in general, how does one debug the build process? 'make -d' just >>seems >>>horrendous.... >>> >>>Ted Neward >>>Java, .NET, XML Services >>>Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing >>>http://www.tedneward.com >>> >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:build-dev- >>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted Neward >>>>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:10 AM >>>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>Cc: build-dev@openjdk.java.net >>>>Subject: RE: T2K needed in Linux, also? >>>> >>>>Yep, had it pointing to the Import JDK (1.6) instead of the binary plug >>>>JDK >>>>(1.7). Thanks. There's a lot of JDKs needed to build the JDK. :-) >>>> >>>>By the way, in case those on this list haven't seen it, the build on >>Intel >>>>machines won't work, as there's a compilation error in a source file, >>as >>>>reported on the hotspot-dev list on 7/9 by Sunil Soman. Patch: >>>> >>>>#### >>>> >>>>--- src/cpu/i486/vm/assembler_i486.hpp.old 2007-07-09 >>>>10:29:14.412986944 -0700 >>>>+++ src/cpu/i486/vm/assembler_i486.hpp 2007-07-09 >>>>10:29:31.499389416 -0700 >>>>@@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ >>>> >>>> // Easily misused constructor make them private #ifndef _LP64 >>>>- Address::Address(address loc, RelocationHolder spec); >>>>+ Address(address loc, RelocationHolder spec); >>>> #endif // _LP64 >>>> >>>> public: >>>> >>>>#### >>>> >>>>Peter Kessler reported it as already reported, a la >>>> >>>>http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2007-July/000098.html >>>> >>>>but no official bug had been filed, and there was some concern about >>>>Sunil's >>>>contributor status or whatnot. Not sure what happened to it from there. >>>> >>>>Ted Neward >>>>Java, .NET, XML Services >>>>Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing >>>>http://www.tedneward.com >>>> >>>> >>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 5:52 AM >>>>>To: Ted Neward >>>>>Cc: build-dev@openjdk.java.net >>>>>Subject: Re: T2K needed in Linux, also? >>>>> >>>>>Ted Neward wrote: >>>>>>When trying to build the JDK on a fresh KUbuntu 7.04 system, I get a >>>>>>build error saying libt2k.so cannot be found. Am I missing something? >>>>>> >>>>>Yes, sounds like you are missing the entire binary plug download, or >>>>>haven't properly pointed to it's location. >>>>> >>>>>-phil. >>>>> >>>>>>Ted Neward >>>>>> >>>>>>Java, .NET, XML Services >>>>>> >>>>>>Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing >>>>>> >>>>>>http://www.tedneward.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.8/906 - Release Date: >>>>>>7/17/2007 6:30 PM >>>>>> >>>>>No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.8/906 - Release Date: >>>>7/17/2007 >>>>>6:30 PM >>>>> >>>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.9/907 - Release Date: >>7/18/2007 >>>>3:30 PM >>>> >>>> >>>>No virus found in this incoming message. >>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.9/907 - Release Date: >>7/18/2007 >>>>3:30 PM >>>> >>>No virus found in this outgoing message. >>>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release Date: >>7/24/2007 >>>1:50 PM >>> >>> >>No virus found in this incoming message. >>Checked by AVG Free Edition. >>Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.19/918 - Release Date: 7/25/2007 >>2:55 PM >> > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.23/924 - Release Date: 7/28/2007 > 3:50 PM > >
