Hi, On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Erik Joelsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hello, > > Build changes look ok. I'm in favor with dropping the version number from > the path. There is a README that clearly states the current version and we > don't keep multiple versions in the repo anyway. Doing so would also reduce > repo meta data bloat from doing these upgrades in the future (since > mercurial will not recognize the relationship between the removed and added > files if they aren't in the same place). I second that. We also would be able to more easily see the diffs between one zlib version and the other. .Thomas > > > /Erik > > > > On 2017-01-20 21:15, Xueming Shen wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Please review the change to upgrade the zlib bundled in jdk repo from >> v1.2.8 >> to v1.2.11. jdk9 by default has been configured to build by using the >> native/ >> platform/os's zlib on all non-windows platform [1] So the change will >> only have >> effect on the Windows' binaries. >> >> issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173140 >> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8173140 >> >> As always, any source level changes, compared to the official zlib >> release, other >> than the copyright notes addition, is logged at >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8173140/webrev/src/java. >> base/share/native/libzip/zlib-1.2.11/patches/ChangeLog_java.html >> >> most are for removing the compiler warning. Compared ot 1.2.8 the gz* code >> are removed from the repo. as they are actually not used really by the >> jdk. >> >> (arguably, it appears the version number in directory path zlib-1.2.11 in >> the >> repo is not necessary. The make file changes would not be necessary if the >> path is simply src/java.base/share/native/libzip/zlib) >> >> Thanks, >> Sherman >> >> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8031767 >> > >
