Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Sebastian Ramacher]

On 2019-02-12 13:04:57, Petri Hintukainen wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On 2019-02-11 21:28, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > Thanks for working on this issue. What's the status of the release?
> > Will it be available soon?
> 
> 1.1.0 release has been tagged and should appear in downloads soon.
> 
> I've tested a lot of BD-J apps with OpenJDK 11, and it seems to work
> just well. I'd still expect some new issues when people start using it,
> but we can fix those later.
> 
> Looking at the diff between 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 I wouldn't expect much of
> other regressions than those related to OpenJDK 11; there are no other
> "significant" changes. I left out some other pending changes due to the
> tight schedule.
> 
> No changes to applications are required. ABI minor version has been
> bumped because of there's one new field at the end of one libbluray-
> allocated public struct.

Thanks! That's good news. I'll upload it as soon as it appears in downloads.

Cheers

> 
> - Petri
> 

-- 
Sebastian Ramacher


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Petri Hintukainen]

Hello,

On 2019-02-11 21:28, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Thanks for working on this issue. What's the status of the release?
> Will it be available soon?

1.1.0 release has been tagged and should appear in downloads soon.

I've tested a lot of BD-J apps with OpenJDK 11, and it seems to work
just well. I'd still expect some new issues when people start using it,
but we can fix those later.

Looking at the diff between 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 I wouldn't expect much of
other regressions than those related to OpenJDK 11; there are no other
"significant" changes. I left out some other pending changes due to the
tight schedule.

No changes to applications are required. ABI minor version has been
bumped because of there's one new field at the end of one libbluray-
allocated public struct.

- Petri

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Sebastian Ramacher]

Hi Petri

On 2019-01-22 10:02:40, Petri Hintukainen wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 7:14 AM Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Looking at the commit history, it seems that there have been some
> > changes wrt java
> > compatibility, mostly by you. I wonder whether you'd expect libbluray
> > to work with
> > openjdk-11. If not, is this something on your roadmap, or do you
> > consider this a 
> > stretch goal for the forseeable future?
> 
> Build issues should be fixed in git. OpenJDK 11 can be used to build
> the package, and resulting Java binary code is compatible with OpenJDK
> 6...11.
> 
> There are still few runtime issues, so libbluray does not try to load
> JVM 9 ... 11 yet. But these remaining issues are more or less trivial,
> and just need some testing.
> 
> I've switched to use OpenJDK 11. OpenJDK 9 and 10 are still more or
> less untested, but 11 seems more important version to support.
> 
> What kind of schedule do you have ? We could have libbluray release
> with OpenJDK 11 support in couple of weeks. Even earlier if we fix the
> remaining issues and OpenJDK 9/10 issues in later releases. Anyway, I'd
> expect some new issues when people start using libbluray with OpenJDK
> 9..11.

Thanks for working on this issue. What's the status of the release? Will it be 
available soon?

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Reinhard Tartler]

Hi Adrian,

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:54 PM Adrian Bunk  wrote:

> Due to popcon (and reverse dependencies) libbluray is a key package
> that won't be autoremoved (otherwise it would have been autoremoved
> from buster 9 months ago).
>

That's good to know, thanks for pointing it out.


> A lowered severity only hides the problem, and the later it gets brought
> up the fewer changes are permitted for fixing - until the end of February
> you could even upload a new upstream version, but after that it will be
> unlikely that this will be approved by the release team.
>

Well, the question is whether a new upstream version becomes
available in time. The current version does simply not work
at all with OpenJDK11. Given that we need a new upstream release,
which I expect to introduce significant changes, we may run
into trouble with qualifying for a "soft-freeze" update. It
seems safer to upload (and test, i.e., have it migrated to testing),
way before Feb 12 2019.

The libbluray-bdj binary package has no reverse dependencies,
> so removing it might be a Plan B if no better option would
> be available.
>

I just looked at the code, and it doesn't look like it is
possible to build it without OpenJDK-8 at all. There are files
unconditionally built that #include .

You might be suggesting to use OpenJDK-8 to build, but "simply"
not ship the libbluray-bdj package. That would effectively
drop support for BD menus from Debian, which is why I wouldn't
consider this as a viable plan B.

-- 
regards,
Reinhard

Processed: Re: Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> severity -1 serious
Bug #893227 [src:libbluray] libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9
Severity set to 'serious' from 'important'

-- 
893227: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=893227
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> severity -1 important
Bug #893227 [src:libbluray] libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'

-- 
893227: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=893227
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Reinhard Tartler]

Control: severity -1 important

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 7:48 AM Emmanuel Bourg  wrote:

> OpenJDK 8 will be kept in Buster but it should be used in exceptional
> cases (for example the lombok package requires both OpenJDK 8 and 11 to
> build). The default Java runtime for Buster is OpenJDK 11 and the
> packages have to work properly with it.
>

Thank you for this clarification. I agree that we should switch
to OpenJDK 11 as soon as there is an upstream version available
that allows this.

Since openjdk-8 is going to be kept in Buster, I don't think
we need to keep this bug at RC severity. I'm concerned that keeping
this bug at RC severity might risk having libbluray being removed
from testing, which I don't think is in the best interest of our
users.


-- 
regards,
Reinhard

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Hi Reinhard,

Le 22/01/2019 à 12:14, Reinhard Tartler a écrit :

> Can you please give us an update on the roadmap for Java?
> What's the status on removing openjdk-8 from buster?

OpenJDK 8 will be kept in Buster but it should be used in exceptional
cases (for example the lombok package requires both OpenJDK 8 and 11 to
build). The default Java runtime for Buster is OpenJDK 11 and the
packages have to work properly with it.

@Petri: Thank you for fixing the OpenJDK 11 issues. I suggest ignoring
the JDK 9 and 10 issues since these versions are now EOL. The general
consensus in the Java community is to support only the LTS releases
(Java 8, 11, 17, etc).

Emmanuel Bourg

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Reinhard Tartler]

Hi Petri,

The schedule for Debian can be seen at https://wiki.debian.org/DebianBuster:

   -

   2014-11-09: Distribution codename announced
   
   -

   2017-06-17: Stretch  is released,
   and buster becomes testing 
   -

   2019-01-12: Transition freeze (announced
   )
   - 2019-02-12: Soft freeze
   - 2019-03-12: Full freeze

So assuming the new libblueray doesn't require changes in
depending packages we have until Feburary 12 to upload (AND TEST)
an updated package.

Hi Emmanuel,

You may or may not remember, the Debian Multimedia team has been
asked earlier last year to look into getting libbluray to work
with newer JDKs. There is some progress, but apparently we are
just not quite there yet, please see Petri's message below.

Can you please give us an update on the roadmap for Java?
What's the status on removing openjdk-8 from buster?

Best,
-rt

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 3:02 AM Petri Hintukainen 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 7:14 AM Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> > Looking at the commit history, it seems that there have been some
> > changes wrt java
> > compatibility, mostly by you. I wonder whether you'd expect libbluray
> > to work with
> > openjdk-11. If not, is this something on your roadmap, or do you
> > consider this a
> > stretch goal for the forseeable future?
>
> Build issues should be fixed in git. OpenJDK 11 can be used to build
> the package, and resulting Java binary code is compatible with OpenJDK
> 6...11.
>
> There are still few runtime issues, so libbluray does not try to load
> JVM 9 ... 11 yet. But these remaining issues are more or less trivial,
> and just need some testing.
>
> I've switched to use OpenJDK 11. OpenJDK 9 and 10 are still more or
> less untested, but 11 seems more important version to support.
>
> What kind of schedule do you have ? We could have libbluray release
> with OpenJDK 11 support in couple of weeks. Even earlier if we fix the
> remaining issues and OpenJDK 9/10 issues in later releases. Anyway, I'd
> expect some new issues when people start using libbluray with OpenJDK
> 9..11.
>
> - Petri
>
>
>

-- 
regards,
Reinhard

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Petri Hintukainen]

Hello,

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 7:14 AM Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Looking at the commit history, it seems that there have been some
> changes wrt java
> compatibility, mostly by you. I wonder whether you'd expect libbluray
> to work with
> openjdk-11. If not, is this something on your roadmap, or do you
> consider this a 
> stretch goal for the forseeable future?

Build issues should be fixed in git. OpenJDK 11 can be used to build
the package, and resulting Java binary code is compatible with OpenJDK
6...11.

There are still few runtime issues, so libbluray does not try to load
JVM 9 ... 11 yet. But these remaining issues are more or less trivial,
and just need some testing.

I've switched to use OpenJDK 11. OpenJDK 9 and 10 are still more or
less untested, but 11 seems more important version to support.

What kind of schedule do you have ? We could have libbluray release
with OpenJDK 11 support in couple of weeks. Even earlier if we fix the
remaining issues and OpenJDK 9/10 issues in later releases. Anyway, I'd
expect some new issues when people start using libbluray with OpenJDK
9..11.

- Petri

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Reinhard Tartler]

Hi Petri,

I'm following up on a question that Sebatian (CC'ed) asked on the mailing
list last march [1].
The issue is that Debian intends to drop openjdk-8 in favor of openjdk-11,
and we as package
maintainers of libbluray are asked to look into this transition. Your
response back then
was that there are non-trivial changes to the code necessary to make this
work.

Looking at the commit history, it seems that there have been some changes
wrt java
compatibility, mostly by you. I wonder whether you'd expect libbluray to
work with
openjdk-11. If not, is this something on your roadmap, or do you consider
this a
stretch goal for the forseeable future?

Please let me know what your thoughts on this issue are..

Best,
-rt

[1]
https://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/libbluray-devel/2018-March/002890.html

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 9:15 AM Adrian Bunk  wrote:

> Source: libbluray
> Version: 1:1.0.2-2
> Severity: serious
>
>
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/libbluray.html
>
> ...
>
> compile:
> [javac] /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/build.xml:24:
> warning: 'includeantruntime' was not set, defaulting to
> build.sysclasspath=last; set to false for repeatable builds
> [javac] Using javac -source 1.4 is no longer supported, switching to
> 1.6
> [javac] Using javac -target 1.4 is no longer supported, switching to
> 1.6
> [javac] Compiling 664 source files to
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/build
> [javac] warning: [options] bootstrap class path not set in conjunction
> with -source 1.6
> [javac] warning: [options] source value 1.6 is obsolete and will be
> removed in a future release
> [javac] warning: [options] target value 1.6 is obsolete and will be
> removed in a future release
> [javac] warning: [options] To suppress warnings about obsolete
> options, use -Xlint:-options.
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java-j2se/java/awt/peer/BDFramePeer.java:176:
> error: package sun.awt.CausedFocusEvent does not exist
> [javac] public boolean requestFocus(Component c, boolean a,
> boolean b, long l, sun.awt.CausedFocusEvent.Cause d) {
> [javac]
> ^
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/blurayx/s3d/ti/StereoscopicCodingType.java:37:
> warning: non-varargs call of varargs method with inexact argument type for
> last parameter;
> [javac] type =
> (CodingType)constructor.newInstance(new String[] { "MPEG4_MVC_VIDEO" });
> [javac]
> ^
> [javac]   cast to Object for a varargs call
> [javac]   cast to Object[] for a non-varargs call and to suppress this
> warning
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/blurayx/uhd/ti/UHDCodingType.java:38:
> warning: non-varargs call of varargs method with inexact argument type for
> last parameter;
> [javac] type =
> (CodingType)constructor.newInstance(new String[] { "HEVC_VIDEO" });
> [javac]
> ^
> [javac]   cast to Object for a varargs call
> [javac]   cast to Object[] for a non-varargs call and to suppress this
> warning
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:81:
> warning: [removal] classDepth(String) in SecurityManager has been
> deprecated and marked for removal
> [javac] if
> (classDepth("javax.crypto.JceSecurityManager") < 3) {
> [javac] ^
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:88:
> warning: [removal] classDepth(String) in SecurityManager has been
> deprecated and marked for removal
> [javac] if (classDepth("org.videolan.Libbluray") == 3)
> {
> [javac] ^
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:97:
> warning: [removal] classDepth(String) in SecurityManager has been
> deprecated and marked for removal
> [javac] if (classDepth("sun.awt.AWTAutoShutdown") > 0) {
> [javac] ^
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:222:
> warning: [removal] checkSystemClipboardAccess() in SecurityManager has been
> deprecated and marked for removal
> [javac] public void checkSystemClipboardAccess() {
> [javac] ^
> [javac]
> /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java-j2se/java/io/BDFileSystemImpl.java:21:
> error: BDFileSystemImpl is not abstract and does not override abstract
> method getNameMax(String) in FileSystem
> [javac] class BDFileSystemImpl extends BDFileSystem {
> [javac] ^
> [javac] Note: Some input files use or override a deprecated API.
> [javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.
> [javac] Note: Some input files use unchecked or unsafe 

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Emmanuel Bourg]

Hi Sebastian,

On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 17:07:38 +0200 Sebastian Ramacher wrote:

> Where can I find an official announcement that openjdk-8 will be dropped?

The Java Team intends to switch to OpenJDK 11 for Buster (11 is the next
Java LTS release). OpenJDK 8 isn't guaranteed to be supported upstream
beyond 2020 and thus shouldn't be used for Buster. The issue is, we
don't know yet if we'll manage to complete the transition to OpenJDK 11
in time for Buster, so as a last resort we may revert to OpenJDK 8.
We'll assess the situation before the freeze, but it's critical that
packages get fixed as soon as possible.

Emmanuel Bourg

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Sebastian Ramacher]

On 2018-04-03 17:50:16, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Control: severity -1 serious
> 
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 02:54:50PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > Control: severity -1 important
> > Control: tags -1 + upstream
> > 
> > The current version forces the build to use OpenJDK 8. This is currently 
> > also
> > necessary during runtime. While the build issues can be "fixed" easily,
> > libbluray-bdj requires more work to be compatbile with OpenJDK 9. The 
> > changes in
> > JAR handling break -bdj and thus this requires some more upstream work.
> 
> RC bugs have already been filed against other packages that depend or 
> build depend on openjdk-8, I'm adjusting the severity accordingly.

Where can I find an official announcment that openjdk-8 will be dropped?

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Processed: Re: Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> severity -1 serious
Bug #893227 [src:libbluray] libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9
Severity set to 'serious' from 'important'

-- 
893227: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=893227
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Processed: Re: Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Processing control commands:

> severity -1 important
Bug #893227 [src:libbluray] libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
> tags -1 + upstream
Bug #893227 [src:libbluray] libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9
Added tag(s) upstream.

-- 
893227: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=893227
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Sebastian Ramacher]

Control: severity -1 important
Control: tags -1 + upstream

The current version forces the build to use OpenJDK 8. This is currently also
necessary during runtime. While the build issues can be "fixed" easily,
libbluray-bdj requires more work to be compatbile with OpenJDK 9. The changes in
JAR handling break -bdj and thus this requires some more upstream work.

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#893227: libbluray FTBFS with openjdk-9

[Adrian Bunk]

Source: libbluray
Version: 1:1.0.2-2
Severity: serious

https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/unstable/amd64/libbluray.html

...

compile:
[javac] /build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/build.xml:24: warning: 
'includeantruntime' was not set, defaulting to build.sysclasspath=last; set to 
false for repeatable builds
[javac] Using javac -source 1.4 is no longer supported, switching to 1.6
[javac] Using javac -target 1.4 is no longer supported, switching to 1.6
[javac] Compiling 664 source files to 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/build
[javac] warning: [options] bootstrap class path not set in conjunction with 
-source 1.6
[javac] warning: [options] source value 1.6 is obsolete and will be removed 
in a future release
[javac] warning: [options] target value 1.6 is obsolete and will be removed 
in a future release
[javac] warning: [options] To suppress warnings about obsolete options, use 
-Xlint:-options.
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java-j2se/java/awt/peer/BDFramePeer.java:176:
 error: package sun.awt.CausedFocusEvent does not exist
[javac] public boolean requestFocus(Component c, boolean a, boolean b, 
long l, sun.awt.CausedFocusEvent.Cause d) {
[javac] 
   ^
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/blurayx/s3d/ti/StereoscopicCodingType.java:37:
 warning: non-varargs call of varargs method with inexact argument type for 
last parameter;
[javac] type = 
(CodingType)constructor.newInstance(new String[] { "MPEG4_MVC_VIDEO" });
[javac]^
[javac]   cast to Object for a varargs call
[javac]   cast to Object[] for a non-varargs call and to suppress this 
warning
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/blurayx/uhd/ti/UHDCodingType.java:38:
 warning: non-varargs call of varargs method with inexact argument type for 
last parameter;
[javac] type = 
(CodingType)constructor.newInstance(new String[] { "HEVC_VIDEO" });
[javac]^
[javac]   cast to Object for a varargs call
[javac]   cast to Object[] for a non-varargs call and to suppress this 
warning
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:81:
 warning: [removal] classDepth(String) in SecurityManager has been deprecated 
and marked for removal
[javac] if (classDepth("javax.crypto.JceSecurityManager") < 
3) {
[javac] ^
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:88:
 warning: [removal] classDepth(String) in SecurityManager has been deprecated 
and marked for removal
[javac] if (classDepth("org.videolan.Libbluray") == 3) {
[javac] ^
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:97:
 warning: [removal] classDepth(String) in SecurityManager has been deprecated 
and marked for removal
[javac] if (classDepth("sun.awt.AWTAutoShutdown") > 0) {
[javac] ^
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java/org/videolan/BDJSecurityManager.java:222:
 warning: [removal] checkSystemClipboardAccess() in SecurityManager has been 
deprecated and marked for removal
[javac] public void checkSystemClipboardAccess() {
[javac] ^
[javac] 
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/java-j2se/java/io/BDFileSystemImpl.java:21:
 error: BDFileSystemImpl is not abstract and does not override abstract method 
getNameMax(String) in FileSystem
[javac] class BDFileSystemImpl extends BDFileSystem {
[javac] ^
[javac] Note: Some input files use or override a deprecated API.
[javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.
[javac] Note: Some input files use unchecked or unsafe operations.
[javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:unchecked for details.
[javac] 2 errors
[javac] 10 warnings

BUILD FAILED
/build/1st/libbluray-1.0.2/src/libbluray/bdj/build.xml:24: Compile failed; see 
the compiler error output for details.

Total time: 1 minute 42 seconds
make[2]: *** [Makefile:2605: all-local] Error 1