On 04/02/2013 10:42 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
> I regret the fact that I did not test the fix for 8009988 (see below)
> when I reviewed it. The script as written there assumes that the
> 'which' utility will return nothing if the command is not found. On
> some platforms (Solaris and Windows/Cygwin to
Hi all,
While finishing up the netbeans JDBC project, I tried to run the jtreg target
and received the following error;
/Users/lance/Documents/hg-workspaces/jdk8/jdbc-jdk/jdk/make/netbeans/common/shared.xml:289:
A source file is missing
:/Users/lance/Documents/hg-workspaces/jdk8/jdbc-jdk/jdk
On 2013-04-05 14:54, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Andrew,
On 5/04/2013 8:39 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
Still need a reviewer for this.
This looks okay as a first step. Second step would be to connect
DEBUG_ALL_BINARIES to a configure option.
This needs to be tested on all platforms, for which we
Hi Andrew,
On 5/04/2013 8:39 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
Still need a reviewer for this.
This looks okay as a first step. Second step would be to connect
DEBUG_ALL_BINARIES to a configure option.
This needs to be tested on all platforms, for which we'll need to wait
for Tim or Erik to step in
Changeset: e22961ea91bd
Author:erikj
Date: 2013-04-05 09:39 +0200
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/jdk/rev/e22961ea91bd
8008373: JFR JTReg tests fail with CompilationError on MacOSX; missing
'._sunec.jar'
Reviewed-by: tbell
! makefiles/CompileDemos.gmk
! makefiles/Compil
Changeset: 3b8ffb80db0f
Author:erikj
Date: 2013-04-05 09:38 +0200
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/build/rev/3b8ffb80db0f
8008373: JFR JTReg tests fail with CompilationError on MacOSX; missing
'._sunec.jar'
Reviewed-by: tbell
! common/autoconf/basics.m4
! common/autoconf/gener
Still need a reviewer for this.
- Original Message -
> With the new build system, the availability of debugging information in the
> JDK build is a complete mess, controlled by different flags from those that
> control the HotSpot build.
>
> Even when debugging is asked for, it is only tu
- Original Message -
> All -
>
> I regret the fact that I did not test the fix for 8009988 (see below)
> when I reviewed it. The script as written there assumes that the
> 'which' utility will return nothing if the command is not found. On
> some platforms (Solaris and Windows/Cygwin t
