On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 00:17:14 GMT, Nizar Benalla <[email protected]> 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
