On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com> wrote: > On 2016-11-28 16:28, Volker Simonis wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Erik Joelsson > <erik.joels...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Looks good. > > /Erik > > > > On 2016-11-28 10:43, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > > When building with VS2010 without SP1, the build will fail with: > LINK : fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file > invalid or corrupt > > This creates frustration and support questions in the build mailing list > from time to time. > > We should check for VS2010 without SP1 at configure time, and fail if this > is detected. > > I don't think this is really an issue of VS2010 vs. VS2010 SP1. It is > actually a problem of installation order. Please see my previous mail > to build-dev > (http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2015-April/014775.html) > and the corresponding stack overflow article: > > ... > the COFF isue is a known problem with VS2010 after installing VS2012 > or .NET 4.5.1. There exist various workarounds - just google for "LINK > : fatal error LNK1123: failure during conversion to COFF: file > invalid". > > The easiest and fastes solution is to remove the bad version of > "cvtres.exe" which is causing the problem as explained in the second > answer at the stackowerflow question > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10888391/error-link-fatal-error-lnk1123-failure-during-conversion-to-coff-file-inval > ... > > I'm still happily building with VS2010 and I don't see a reason why we > should artificially prevent users from doing so. > > > I see. The analysis in the bug report was apparently wrong. > > It seems that the proper (and only?) way to test this is to try to compile > an rc file and see if it fails. > > This seems way too much work for an unlikely issue. I'll just drop that > functionality as a wontfix. > > However, I still like the code I wrote that checks for a minimum version for > the microsoft toolchain, as all the other toolchains. :-) > > I'm going to lower the version check to 16.00.30319.01 (2010 without SP1), > repurpose the patch and try again. >
Hi Magnus, yes the version check itself is nice :) Maybe you can leave it in place as is but instead of failing just write out a warning? I don't know if a link to the appropriate stackoverflow article would be acceptable here, but I think that would definitely help. Otherwise I con provide a few lines which describe the problem and a possible solution. Thank you and best regards, Volker > /Magnus > > > Regards, > Volker > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072413 > WebRev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8072413-require-vs2010-sp1/webrev.01 > > /Magnus > >
