The scan of all the binary files in Release.gmk should check all the exe and dll's in the jdk and jre images. Do effectively, all the files should be checked twice. But if missed when it was built or copied in, the
Release.gmk check should catch it.

-kto

On Jan 4, 2011, at 2:14 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:

Looks like a good addition to me. Is there a way to ensure that binary file verification is exhaustively applied? ie. that every DLL or .so in a distribution has been checked?

Mike

On Jan 4 2011, at 12:00 , [email protected] wrote:

Send build-dev mailing list submissions to
        [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/build-dev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        [email protected]

You can reach the person managing the list at
        [email protected]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of build-dev digest..."


Today's Topics:

 1. Re: Fwd: Re: hotspot build problems (Per Bothner)
 2. Need Reviewer: binary_file_verification (Kelly O'Hair)
 3. Re: A More FHS-Compliant JDK Install (Andrew Haley)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 15:42:41 -0800
From: Per Bothner <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: hotspot build problems
To: HotSpot Open Source Developers <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

There were some recent changes to make/linux/makefiles/launcher.make,
so my patch no longer applies.  Here is an updated patch.

I've verified that the patch is still needed (on Fedora 14 with
SELinux enabled), and that it is "complete", in the sense that
top-level make clean && make completes successfully.
--
        --Per Bothner
[email protected]   [email protected]   http://per.bothner.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: chcon-launcher2.patch
Url: 
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/attachments/20110103/0fff6ade/attachment-0001.ksh

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2011 18:01:15 -0800
From: "Kelly O'Hair" <[email protected]>
Subject: Need Reviewer: binary_file_verification
To: build-dev <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Need reviewer: Misc fixes related to binary file checks

This started out as fixing a rebase bug but we also needed to verify
that our libraries were
built properly, so the binary_file_verification define was created to
do this.
The checks are not nailed down yet, but I need to get the calls to the
binary_file_verification
define in place first.

Initially the plan was to do this check when the j2sdk-image was
created, but it seemed to make
sense to verify the binaries where they are created and as they get
imported in so we can catch
problem binaries as soon as possible.

6413588: Add 'ldd -r' and 'dump -Lv' checks to all .so files delivered
in the JDK
6975326: Problem in install/make/rebase/Makefile, grep on empty pattern 7000995: Add check in makefiles to verify that msvcp100.dll is NOT used

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk7/jdk7-build-binary_file_verification/webrev/

On Windows we currently want to make sure the DLL can have a Dynamic
base, and that it
is NX compatible (DEP).
On Solaris and Linux, there is mostly just runs of ldd, nm, and dump/
readobj, the specific
things we want to check for may take a little more time to nail down.
This binary_file_verification also provides some details in the build
log with regards
to the library dependencies, which may be of use someday in tracking
down dependency issues.

-kto
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/attachments/20110103/fc7f8b1c/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:48:40 +0000
From: Andrew Haley <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: A More FHS-Compliant JDK Install
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed

On 01/03/2011 03:09 AM, Lussier, Denis wrote:
I too like the idea that the version of OpenJDK that comes pre- built with your Linux distro is pre-installed and just works. But... I wonder how/if the Linux Distro's will configure simultaneously with JDK6& JDK7 when they
are both mainstream.

Hopefully, the usual Java backwards compatibility will be maintained,
so mostly it won't matter.  However, the packages may be installed
side-by-side, with a symlink for the global default. Like this example
from Fedora 13:

/usr/bin/java -->
/etc/alternatives/java -->
/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/bin/java

I can't yet comment on whether distros will choose to allow multiple
JDKs, though: just that there is no strong technical reason that
forbids it.

Andrew.


End of build-dev Digest, Vol 45, Issue 4
****************************************


Reply via email to