Yes, VS2003 works OK even on Windows 8.1 On 12 Feb 2014, at 01:56, Alex Kasko <m...@alexkasko.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > I think it would be great to ditch VS2003 to not have license problems and > backporting incompatibilities like this - > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/2013-December/003163.html > > But I am more concerned about amd64 version. I guess Windows Server 2003 > Platform SDK support also will be ditched in spite of not having license > problems? > > Also VS2010 Express is a "registerware" may be it's better to use free > Windows SDK 7.1 (from VS as a "toolset" or separate) as it is already > mandatory for jdk7 amd64 "free" builds? > > PS: as a side-note, VS2003 works fine (at least for builds, not sure for the > development) on Windows 7 SP1. > > On 02/10/2014 08:13 PM, Phil Race wrote: >> Hi, >> >> My goal here was just to point out some of the issues/scope etc so that you >> and the present openjdk6 maintainers can decide how to proceed. >> BTW you had written ' to accommodate usage of Visual Studio 2010 " >> which I read as meaning allow in addition to VS 2003, not replace it. >> >> -phil. >> >> On 2/10/2014 12:05 PM, Ivan Krylov wrote: >>> Phil, >>> >>> First, I do have a license for VS2003. And more so, one can by vs2003 >>> for some third party stores, it is just that Microsoft does not sell >>> or support VS2003. >>> The build problem with the compiler version is not my personal one. >>> >>> There is a good point about figuring out what set of builds/tests >>> could be considered comprehensive. There is no JPRT in the open. We do >>> test 32 and 64 bit builds. >>> I do not have a solution that would retain compatibility with VS2003. >>> And the changes that I have borrow quite a bit of native code in >>> windows/native/java/net and awt/java2d for openjdk7. This might have >>> impact with regards to bug-to-bug compatibility with existing builds >>> of OpenJDK6 for Windows. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ivan >>> >>> >>> On 10/02/2014 23:42, Phil Race wrote: >>>> There was a lot of work to the build system and source code >>>> to upgrade JDK7 to VS2010. Whilst a good chunk of that work was >>>> in closed repositories you will still find a fair amount to do .. >>>> >>>> As many as we could find/remember about got a 'vs2010' label >>>> So the query >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20JDK%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20vs2010 >>>> >>>> probably should also give some perspective on some of the bugs/changes >>>> but doesn't give a detailed picture of the build updates needed. >>>> You would need to test 32 & 64 bit on preferred build platforms >>>> and ensure its builds with the free SDK as well as VS. >>>> And will your patch mean that people who have Vs2003 and a set up >>>> that works be broken? How will you test that if you don't have VS2003 >>>> Plus where you make changes to shared build files you'll need to ensure >>>> builds on other platforms aren't broken either. >>>> So a lot of building and testing and follow-on fixing will result >>>> from that >>>> 'patch' which makes for a non-trivial amount of work for a release >>>> that's getting old. >>>> >>>> -phil. >>>> >>>> On 2/10/2014 11:17 AM, Omair Majid wrote: >>>>> * Ivan Krylov <i...@azulsystems.com> [2014-02-10 13:57]: >>>>>> The build system for OpenJDK6 for Windows uses Visual Studio 2003. >>>>>> This is a problem for those who do not have a license as you may not >>>>>> purchase this software anymore. >>>>> Ouch. >>>>> >>>>>> The proposal is to modify the build systems and somewhat sources to >>>>>> accommodate usage of Visual Studio 2010 >>>>>> >>>>>> If that is something openjdk6 community is interested in I could >>>>>> contribute a patch. >>>>> I don't work on Windows, so I will let others who use it and develop on >>>>> it chime in. >>>>> >>>>>> I am also unfamiliar with the logistics here: seems that not all >>>>>> changes in OpenJdk6 have corresponding bug entries in OpenJDK bug >>>>>> database. >>>>> Yeah. It's a bit of a historical accident. When Oracle stopped >>>>> developing OpenJDK 6, the rest of us decided that we need a public bug >>>>> tracker and settled on https://java.net/jira/browse/OPENJDK6. We still >>>>> use the original bug ids for backports, but OpenJDK6-specific bugs get >>>>> this new-style bug id. >>>>> >>>>>> Should RFR be simply sent to this list? >>>>> Yeah, this list will probably be the best place to post patches >>>>> specific >>>>> to OpenJDK6 only. It will probably be better if the RFR brings the >>>>> build >>>>> system closer to that of OpenJDK 7, which lists Visual Studio 2010 as >>>>> the official compiler [1]. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Omair >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/raw-file/dada8003df87/README-builds.html#msvc32 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > -Alex >
