2012-03-26 18:13, Kelly O'Hair skrev:
* The "@GenerateNativeHeader" additions seem like they deserve some kind of comment,
maybe a short one on the same line, like "No native methods here, but the constants are needed
in the supporting JNI code" or something like that?
Good idea!
* The top
On 03/26/2012 02:01 PM, Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
2012-03-26 13:34, Jonathan Gibbons skrev:
Right now, in the current build, we use a "hybrid" javadoc to build
the API documentation, where "hybrid" means: latest sources, running
on bootstrap JDK.
Looking to the future, at least for Jigsaw, and
Nothing that can't be fixed or adjusted after the initial integration. So
consider me a reviewer.
Just a few comments.
* I noticed that the copyright years were a little strange, saying "Copyright
(c) 2007, 2011," instead of "Copyright (c) 2011, 2012," or "Copyright (c)
2012,".
* The "@Genera
2012-03-26 13:34, Jonathan Gibbons skrev:
Right now, in the current build, we use a "hybrid" javadoc to build
the API documentation, where "hybrid" means: latest sources, running
on bootstrap JDK.
Looking to the future, at least for Jigsaw, and now maybe for JSR 308,
we may need to run javado
On 26/03/2012 10:43 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 26/03/2012 12:34, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Right now, in the current build, we use a "hybrid" javadoc to build
the API documentation, where "hybrid" means: latest sources, running
on bootstrap JDK.
Looking to the future, at least for Jigsaw, and now
On 26/03/2012 12:34, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Right now, in the current build, we use a "hybrid" javadoc to build
the API documentation, where "hybrid" means: latest sources, running
on bootstrap JDK.
Looking to the future, at least for Jigsaw, and now maybe for JSR 308,
we may need to run jav
On 26/03/2012 10:33 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 26/03/2012 11:42, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Alan,
Really? I'm not sure I agree. If you have a complete and successful
build of JDK 8, then you should pretty much always be able to use that
as a bootstrap JDK.
No argument on that case as everything s
On 26/03/2012 11:42, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Alan,
Really? I'm not sure I agree. If you have a complete and successful
build of JDK 8, then you should pretty much always be able to use that
as a bootstrap JDK.
No argument on that case as everything should match. The case I'm
concerned about
Right now, in the current build, we use a "hybrid" javadoc to build the
API documentation, where "hybrid" means: latest sources, running on
bootstrap JDK.
Looking to the future, at least for Jigsaw, and now maybe for JSR 308,
we may need to run javadoc on the newly built JDK. Does anyone see
On 03/26/2012 12:09 PM, Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
However, I agree that reading the makefiles really, is not an option for
most people.
... or even desirable. :-)
-- Jon
2012-03-26 12:05, Michael McMahon skrev:
> Thanks. It looks like the first of the three options above is most
> similar to the verbosity
> level of the old build. Is all of this documented anywhere?
Well, I have so far really tried to comment in the makefiles. So the
"make VERBOSE="
trick is the
Hi all,
So I'm building new VMs to try the various OpenJDK builds and have run
across a pretty consistent problem using Lubuntu 11.10 (32-bit) with
the detection of ANT.
I have ANT 1.8.2 installed (Ant 1.7 is clearly removed) but 'make
sanity' insists that the ANT version I have is 1.7.0.
* My D
Alan,
Really? I'm not sure I agree. If you have a complete and successful
build of JDK 8, then you should pretty much always be able to use that
as a bootstrap JDK.
That being said, I do not disagree with the general advice to use 7u4 as
the bootstrap JDK.
-- Jon
On 03/26/2012 03:37 AM,
On 26/03/2012 02:25, Weijun Wang wrote:
:
There is completely no harm in setting JDK 8 as BOOTDIR of JDK 8, but
I would suggest you using 7u4. If there is anything wrong, you can
send us a bug report.
I don't think we can guarantee that jdk8 will always be buildable using
another jdk8 build a
On 23/03/12 19:11, Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
in increasing order of verbosity
make VERBOSE=
make VERBOSE=-d
make VERBOSE="-d -p"
Thanks. It looks like the first of the three options above is most
similar to the verbosity
level of the old build. Is all of this documented anywhere?
I think at th
Looks good!
On 24 mar 2012, at 00:45, Nils Loodin wrote:
> Removed a folder in a jar-file and the classes into other folders, so some of
> the lines in Release.gmk became unnecessary.
> This should be cleaned up.
>
> Here's a very simple webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~nloodin/7156000/web
16 matches
Mail list logo
