Hi Volker,
On 4/02/2015 3:09 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
Hi,
is somebody working on this issue?
It is assigned to Gerald but I don't know what his current priorities
are. Also I hope we're trying to figure out whether the best way to fix
this is to change the code or change the build flags -
On 3/02/2015 11:25 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-02-02 23:14, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Magnus,
On 3/02/2015 1:51 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
When a header file is deleted, make will complain "No rule to make
target ". This often breaks incremental build
completely unnecessary.
When/w
Hi,
is somebody working on this issue?
It's really annoying that is is not possible to build on plain Solaris
11 system any more.
Regards,
Volker
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 1:32 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> The Solaris problem doesn't appear when using our S10u6 devkits so wasn't
> noticed internal
On 02/03/2015 05:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-02-02 19:33, Phil Race wrote:
http://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 added a depedency
check but it was not working because this depends on file declaration
order.
This resolves that which can cause occasional Solaris build fa
Hi Magnus,
Thanks, in that case I'll submit a patch and see what people think, if it's
too big a change then I can always redo in pieces. I'm personally OK with
HTML, pretty used to making it play nice, but have noting against Markdown
either.
Cheers,
Martijn
On 3 February 2015 at 13:50, Magnus
On 2015-02-01 11:16, Martijn Verburg wrote:
Hi all,
I'm sitting at FOSDEM and was reminded that we hadn't yet made the effort
to integrate the "How to build OpenJDK" material we've built up over on
adoptopendk.java.net (the incubator site for Adoption Group activities) as
well as tidying up some
On 2015-02-02 19:33, Phil Race wrote:
http://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 added a depedency
check but it was not working because this depends on file declaration
order.
This resolves that which can cause occasional Solaris build failures by
ensuring that HEADLESS is declared before
On 2015-02-03 14:17, Ingemar Aberg wrote:
Some of the target names in the makefiles are inconsistent and does
not clearly reflect what they do. They should be improved but the old
names should be kept as aliases for people who are used to them.
Examples:
images -> product-images
docs -> docs-
On 2015-02-02 23:14, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Magnus,
On 3/02/2015 1:51 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
When a header file is deleted, make will complain "No rule to make
target ". This often breaks incremental build
completely unnecessary.
When/why would a header file be deleted?
Because it is
Some of the target names in the makefiles are inconsistent and does not
clearly reflect what they do. They should be improved but the old names
should be kept as aliases for people who are used to them.
Examples:
images -> product-images
docs -> docs-image
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/b
Hiya David ,
Like you, I don't understand why a header file might be deleted following
compilation but I can 'sort of' understand why it might not actually be
needed following that compilation. Having said that, it makes no sense that
a header file required for the initial compilation would not be
11 matches
Mail list logo
