I'm combining this fix with another as it was starting to make my head split trying to keep the two separate, they're just too closely related. I'll start another review thread for the combined patches.
-DrD- > > Nobody should be using this any more, can I nuke it? > > BASIC_DEPRECATED_ARG_ENABLE(macosx-runtime-support, macosx_runtime_support) > > That hasn't done anything since JDK7, it was deprecated in 8 and shouldn't > even be used in 8. > > -DrD- > >> >> Now that my mind is fresher and I've had my coffee... (and someones poked me >> in the ribs ;) >> >> MACOSX_SDK_PATH should be SDKROOT, which is what Apple uses when building >> via Xcode or xcodebuild, which would also promote that setting to the few >> remaining Xcode projects we have hanging around. We can use SYSROOT, but >> Apple's tools will just ignore it so I propose we add SDKROOT as a synonym >> for SYSROOT. Unfortunately the -F arguments still need to be absolute paths. >> >> We can eliminate the hard coded ApplicationServices paths by including >> ApplicationServices instead of it's sub-frameworks (and adjust the source >> accordingly), but we can't do that for JavaVM as we absolutely do NOT want >> to link against JavaVM, only JNF and JRS. >> >> >> We'll do something like: >> >> # assuming SYSROOT="$with_sysroot" already >> if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_OS" = xmacosx; then >> if test ! -d "$SYSROOT"; then >> # SYSROOT is not a directory, check if it's a symbolic name for an Xcode >> SDK >> SYSROOT=`$(XCODEBUILD) -sdk "$SYSROOT" -version | grep '^Path: ' | sed >> 's/Path: //'` >> if test ! -d "$SYSROOT"; then >> AC_MSG_ERROR([SYSROOT does not point to a valid path]) >> fi >> fi >> SDKROOT=$SYSROOT >> AC_SUBST(SDKROOT) >> fi >> >> This will eliminate any added configure arguments. >> >> (14 hours of build system hacking makes for a very muddled mind...) >> >> -DrD- >> >> >>> Hello David, >>> >>> I like that you incorporate the existing sysroot settings for this. I >>> wonder though, what is the difference between --with-macosx-sdk-path and >>> --with-sysroot? Do we really need two parameters for this? If it's actually >>> a sysroot, couldn't we replace all uses of this variable with just SYSROOT >>> and keep it more generic? >>> >>> /Erik >>> >>> On 2014-05-23 08:16, David DeHaven wrote: >>>> Build systems take such a long time work on... >>>> >>>> I've changed the logic, I think for the better. I hijacked --with-sysroot, >>>> SYSROOT is set to the SDK path and I stuffed the -iframework argument >>>> alongside the -isysroot arg in SYSROOT_CFLAGS and it works very nicely. >>>> Now the only change that's peppered throughout the forest is adding >>>> $(MACOSX_SDK_PATH) to the hard coded JavaVM.framework and >>>> ApplicationServices.framework paths, not to mention everything gets >>>> -isysroot/-iframework and not just the parts that needed JavaVM or >>>> ApplicationServices. The added SYSROOT logic is Mac specific so other >>>> platforms should be unaffected, JPRT should tell otherwise if not... >>>> >>>> I also added two configure args: >>>> --with-macosx-sdk name of Mac OS X SDK to build with, e.g., >>>> macosx10.7 >>>> [macosx] >>>> --with-macosx-sdk-path specify path of Mac OS X SDK to build with [probed] >>> >>>> Please note that this version is against jdk9-dev with the following >>>> patches imported from other forests: >>>> hotspot: >>>> JDK-8043164 (jdk9/hs) >>>> >>>> jdk: >>>> JDK-8042440 (jdk9/client) >>>> JDK-8043646 (jdk9/client) >>>> JDK-8003900 (jdk9/client) >>>> >>>> >>>> Updated patches: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/v1/base >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/v1/hotspot >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/v1/jdk >>>> >>>> -DrD- >>>> >>> >> >
