Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread Kelly O'Hair
On Sep 6, 2012, at 1:57 PM, John Coomes wrote: > Kelly O'Hair (kelly.oh...@oracle.com) wrote: >> Yes, but I feel like I need to get some kind of approval from a higher level >> before I try and declare that >> use of THIS_FILE is a 'jdk convention', and that will trigger long debates >> :^( >>

Re: [8] Review request for 7196354 check-in jdk.tbom file to openjdk repo

2012-09-06 Thread Michael Fang
Hi Mark, Thanks for the review and feedback. Please see my comments inline below. thanks, -michael On 12年09月06日 01:29 下午, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2012/9/5 14:08 -0700, michael.f...@oracle.com: Please help to review the new JDK8 file for the following CR: 7196354 check-in jdk.tbom fi

Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread John Coomes
Kelly O'Hair (kelly.oh...@oracle.com) wrote: > Yes, but I feel like I need to get some kind of approval from a higher level > before I try and declare that > use of THIS_FILE is a 'jdk convention', and that will trigger long debates :^( > > I also need to deal with hotspot, which is a bit trickie

Re: [8] Review request for 7196354 check-in jdk.tbom file to openjdk repo

2012-09-06 Thread mark . reinhold
2012/9/5 14:08 -0700, michael.f...@oracle.com: > Please help to review the new JDK8 file for the following CR: > 7196354 check-in jdk.tbom file to openjdk repo > > The webrev is located at: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mfang/7196354/webrev.00/ This file needs a more descriptive name, especially

Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread Kelly O'Hair
Yes, but I feel like I need to get some kind of approval from a higher level before I try and declare that use of THIS_FILE is a 'jdk convention', and that will trigger long debates :^( I also need to deal with hotspot, which is a bit trickier because of the macros being expanded in include file

Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread Kelly O'Hair
I'll fix that. -kto On Sep 6, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > I would like to have sorts added to Demo.gmk too. I just hit a case where it > caused a difference for me between old build and build-infra. > > /Erik > > On 2012-09-06 06:08, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >> Need a reviewer for thi

Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread Erik Joelsson
I would like to have sorts added to Demo.gmk too. I just hit a case where it caused a difference for me between old build and build-infra. /Erik On 2012-09-06 06:08, Kelly O'Hair wrote: Need a reviewer for this change. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk8/jdk8-this-file/webrev/ It

Re: Windows build failure when building JLI

2012-09-06 Thread Artem Ananiev
On 9/6/2012 5:43 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Sep 4, 2012, at 4:53 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: BTW, what's the reason to continue the new build infrastructure development in a separate project (build-infra), not in the master workspace? There are strict formal rules on the build forest, tha

Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread Tim Bell
On 09/05/12 21:08, Kelly O'Hair wrote: Need a reviewer for this change. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk8/jdk8-this-file/webrev/ It does change source, but it's effectively a build change. The goal here is to try and create more predictable binary files and remove the possibility

Re: Need reviewers: more predictable binaries

2012-09-06 Thread Fredrik Öhrström
Looks good. Perhaps we can even remove the "#ifndef THIS_FILE" test in the source files? At some time in the future…. //Fredrik 6 sep 2012 kl. 06:08 skrev Kelly O'Hair: > > Need a reviewer for this change. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk8/jdk8-this-file/webrev/ > > It does ch