Thank you Erik! Vladimir, could you please push http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/8024265.v4 (before we get the next merge conflicts:)
Thanks, Volker On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Erik Joelsson <erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote: > Magnus left for the day, but I'm ok with you pushing this to the stage area. > > /Erik > > > On 2013-09-12 14:29, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> Hi Magnus, >> >> thanks for doing "JDK-8024665 Move open changes for JDK-8020411 to >> closed source"! >> >> Can you now please give Vladimir the GO signal (from a >> build-perspective) to integrate my changes (from >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/8024265.v4/) into the >> ppc-aix-port/stage repository? >> >> Actually my changes revert 8020411 as well. This means that when >> 8024665 will flow into our staging repository, we would have to >> manually resolve platform.m4 to our version which we checked in, but >> that should be OK. >> >> I'd really appreciate if we could push my change now, otherwise we >> would have to wait another couple of weeks until 8024665 goes from >> build -> main -> stage. >> >> Thank you and best regards, >> Volker >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie >> <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 2013-09-11 18:45, Volker Simonis wrote: >>>> >>>> Argh! It conflicts with 8020411 >>>> (http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8020411/webrev.root.01/) from your >>>> last jdk8->stage synchronisation. >>>> >>>> @Magnus, Erik : it seems that '8020411' needed a similar 'feature' to >>>> my actual change but did it without abstracting over the name of the >>>> "compilers target bits" flag name vs. its actual value. Unfortunately >>>> all the users of the change 8020411 are in the closed sources. I'd >>>> really like to stay with my solution (because I think that's the most >>>> general one) and resolve the merge conflicts with 8020411 by >>>> eliminating TARGET_BITS_FLAG which can now be replaced by >>>> "${COMPILER_TARGET_BITS_FLAG}${OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_BITS}. >>> >>> >>> I see. When looking more closely in the fix for JDK-8020411, it turned >>> out >>> that it could do with some improvements: >>> a) since it really only applies to the closed sources, it could (and >>> should) >>> be done only in the closed sources. >>> b) it was actually incorrect, since it removed the ADDED_*FLAGS >>> variables, >>> which are needed for later use to check for incorrect additions to >>> *FLAGS. >>> >>> I am sorry your patch has become caught in this messiness. :( >>> Nevertheless, >>> I think the best way forward is that I create a new patch, that reverts >>> the >>> JDK-8020411 in the open sources and re-implements them in the closed >>> sources. I agree that your solution is better, and what we should have in >>> the open sources. You shouldn't have to care about the TARGET_BITS_FLAG, >>> it >>> is an internal hack. >>> >>> I'll start working on it immediately. >>> >>> /Magnus > >
