On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 17:01:04 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <sh...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Please review this change that adds a `linux-x86-static` job in GHA. The job >> builds the `static-jdk-image` release binary on linux-x64. Please see >> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build-dev/2025-February/048830.html for >> some additional context. >> >> A `debug` build job (building `static-jdk-image` fastdebug binary) is not >> included currently. There is a known issue that causes build failure due to >> resource problem, which causes the `fastdebug` build fail in github >> workflow. Please see more related information in >> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8349399?focusedId=14749789&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14749789. >> >> >> GHA: https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13163673020 > > What's the difference between `build-linux-static.yml` and `build-linux.yml`? > Can we just call `build-linux.yml` to do the static build? > @shipilev Can you help review/approve the change, if no other questions? Sorry for not looking at this sooner. It looks to me that you are trying to work-around a little mess introduced by `static-libs-bundles` addition ([JDK-8337265](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8337265)). Not your mess, but trying to avoid it introduces more headaches. I am somewhat surprised we even have `static-libs-bundles` as additional target in what I would consider a generic `build-linux` job! It looks cleaner to yank `static-libs-bundles` into a separate build job, which would then allow your PR to proceed by just calling `build-linux` normally, without introducing a wholly new job script. Let me try to fix `static-libs-bundles` first. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23471#issuecomment-2671927912
