On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 00:17:14 GMT, Nizar Benalla <nbena...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that adds the necessary changes for local > support of the `tidy` library. > > The dependency can be retrieved by running `make/devkit/createTidyBundle.sh` > on Linux and MacOs systems. > > This dependency is primarily going to be used to test the generated > documentation. > > This patch is meant to be integrated before #21272. > > Note: we need to be a very specific revision of `tidy` and cannot use any of > the available artifacts, as older versions do not recognize some HTML 5 > elements. > > TIA make/conf/jib-profiles.js line 456: > 454: target_os: "macosx", > 455: target_cpu: "aarch64", > 456: dependencies: ["devkit", "gtest", "graphviz", "pandoc", > "tidy"], Is there a reason for not providing Tidy on macosx-x64? It looks like the binary built by the script below would be a multi-arch variant. If so, you should deploy it as just "tidy-html-macosx" and add some code in the dependencies section below that defines "module" as just `"tidy-html" + input.target_os` on macosx. make/conf/jib-profiles.js line 1280: > 1278: tidy: { > 1279: organization: common.organization, > 1280: environment_name: "TIDY", Not sure this is a good idea. This will set an environment variable pointing to the "home_path" of the installation and will conflict with the configure arg below. The configure arg will win, so it will still work, but it could be confusing. A better environment variable name would be something like `TIDY_HOME`, but unless this is needed for something, I would just skip defining one. make/conf/jib-profiles.js line 1284: > 1282: revision: "5.9.20+1", > 1283: environment_path: input.get("tidy", "home_path") + > "/tidy/bin/tidy", > 1284: configure_args: "TIDY=" + input.get("tidy", "home_path") > +"/bin/tidy", These paths are different. I'm guessing the latter one is corret? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21341#discussion_r1790300323 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21341#discussion_r1790306484 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21341#discussion_r1790301745