On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 11:54:39 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> [JDK-8182285](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8182285) added the
> incremental build capabilities for modules, by hashing the APIs of each
> module.
>
> The original change uses MD5, which is quite weak, and
>
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:25:35 GMT, Jiří Vaněk wrote:
>> The run targets of makefile to run J2DBench.jar/J2DAnalyzer.jar were
>> lacking the dist directory. This patch is fixing it. Note, that
>> build.xml have correct paths
>
> Jiří Vaněk has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and
On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 17:04:08 GMT, Jiří Vaněk wrote:
> The run targets of makefile to run J2DBench.jar/J2DAnalyzer.jar were
> lacking the dist directory. This patch is fixing it. Note, that
> build.xml have correct paths
I've filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275872 and am happy to
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:56:22 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> From a build perspective this partially reverts
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8249821 except that it keeps
>> the harfbuzz sources separate and still supports building and running
>> against a system harfbuzz which is only of
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 16:56:22 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> From a build perspective this partially reverts
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8249821 except that it keeps
>> the harfbuzz sources separate and still supports building and running
>> against a system harfbuzz which is only of
On Thu, 9 Sep 2021 14:31:19 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Currently, the build system defaults the libjvm.so location to "server".
>> This makes looking for `libjvm.so` awkward, see JDK-8273487 for example. We
>> need to see if moving the libjvm.so to a proper location breaks anything.
On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 16:43:26 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Please review this tiny patch which removes the special casing of
> `--with-native-debug-symbols=external` for the static libs build. I don't see
> why this is needed. If no debug symbols are wanted
>
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 04:29:52 GMT, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> The latest GCC fails if -fcf-protection is used with an x86 (32-bit) target
> that doesn't support CMOV:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blobdiff;f=gcc/config/i386/i386-options.c;h=a70f6edf7b0bfa6994db372c2507
The latest GCC fails if -fcf-protection is used with an x86 (32-bit) target
that doesn't support CMOV:
On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:32:54 GMT, Kiran Sidhartha Ravikumar
wrote:
>> Looks good. I think we should release-note the removal of the
>> "US/Pacific-New" Link on the off chance that some
>> production/testing system is looking for such a zone.
>
> Thanks for the review everyone, I have added a
On 13/02/2020 11:48, Baesken, Matthias wrote:
> Ping - any reviews ?
>
> Thanks, Matthias
>
> From: Baesken, Matthias
> Sent: Dienstag, 11. Februar 2020 10:24
> To: jdk-updates-...@openjdk.java.net; 'build-dev@openjdk.java.net'
>
> Subject: RFR [jdk11]: 8234525: enable link-time section-gc
On 27/09/2019 16:48, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I please get a review of this 8u build change backport which adds
> --with-extra-asflags to OpenJDK 8u. At Red Hat, we need to pass certain
> assembler only flags for some builds. For example "-Wa,--generate-
>
This is the first of a series of four changes to support -Wreturn-type
in OpenJDK 8u. The -Wreturn-type warning catches instances where control
flow exits a non-void function without returning a value. This can
combine with compiler optimisations in some cases to cause runtime
crashes. The warning
On 30/07/2019 09:48, Andrew Dinn wrote:
> On 29/07/2019 19:30, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> On 7/29/19 7:37 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> So, in light of the changed build system in JDK 9+, and the rather
>>> small changes in this patch (on the grand scheme of things), it seems
>>> reasonable to
On 29/07/2019 11:10, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-07-29 at 10:19 +0100, Andrew Dinn wrote:
>> On 26/07/2019 18:32, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> On 26/07/2019 16:53, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> What exactly is being push
On 26/07/2019 16:53, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Fri, 2019-07-26 at 14:46 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> On 25/07/2019 16:02, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>
>> snip...
>>
>>>> Done now. I've added fix-request comments/labels to the ab
On 25/07/2019 16:02, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
snip...
>>
>> Done now. I've added fix-request comments/labels to the above bugs and
>> rebased on top of them. New jdk changeset:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8222737/04/jdk/webrev/
>>
>> Test groups definition is the JDK 9 set
On 10/07/2019 10:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Christoph,
>
> On Wed, 2019-07-10 at 09:08 +, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>> Hi Severin,
>>
>> You made a little mistake. It must be "-xO4" instead of "-x04" in the
>> Solaris build file (It's the letter O instead of the number 0)
>
> Sigh.
On 28/06/2019 10:52, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Thu, 2019-06-27 at 17:36 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 22/05/2019 17:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Could I please get reviews for this minimal impleme
On 22/05/2019 17:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I please get reviews for this minimal implementation of a tier1-
> like test set for JDK 8u? The implementation is rather barebones as I
> don't think it's worth rewriting the build system just for a command
> that runs a certain set
On 26/06/2019 14:02, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 13:04 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 25/06/2019 10:04, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Could somebody please review this 8u backport? The build system in 8 is
>>
On 25/06/2019 10:04, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could somebody please review this 8u backport? The build system in 8 is
> different, especially hotspot makefiles. Note, libjsig.so is part of
> the hotspot build. The patch is different in 8 (over 11) due to this
> reason. This is a
On 24/06/2019 15:52, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Andrew John Hughes:
>
>> On 24/06/2019 14:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * Severin Gehwolf:
>>>
>>>> Could I please get reviews for this 8u only change? The JDK 8u build
>>>> logic for laun
On 24/06/2019 14:48, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could I please get reviews for this 8u only change? The JDK 8u build
> logic for launcher files includes linker version script files (a.k.a
> mapfiles). The script file for x86 (32bit) marks symbol _IO_stdin_used
> as local. When the symbol
On 24/06/2019 14:54, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Severin Gehwolf:
>
>> Could I please get reviews for this 8u only change? The JDK 8u build
>> logic for launcher files includes linker version script files (a.k.a
>> mapfiles). The script file for x86 (32bit) marks symbol _IO_stdin_used
>> as
On 12/06/2019 20:34, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8223219/webrev.01/
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223219
>
> There's quite a long story to this one, more detail of which is in the
> bug report. In sho
Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8223219/webrev.01/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223219
There's quite a long story to this one, more detail of which is in the
bug report. In short, JDK-8199552 was backported as part of a CPU with
no review and so little
On 29/03/2019 10:51, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Looks good to me now
>
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew John Hughes
>> Sent: Freitag, 29. März 2019 07:18
>> To: Langer, Christoph ; Severin Gehwolf
>> ; 'jdk8u-...@openjdk.java.net'
On 28/03/2019 09:30, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> Revised HotSpot webrev:
>>>
>>> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/hotspot.02
>>
>> +++ new/src/share/vm/runtime/vm_version.cpp 2019-03-28
>> 03:52:51.384737947 +
>> @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@
>>
>> const char*
On 28/03/2019 08:51, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-03-28 at 03:56 +0000, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> On 26/03/2019 21:57, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> thanks for doing this backport. I agree, Severin's finding needs to be
>&
On 26/03/2019 21:57, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> thanks for doing this backport. I agree, Severin's finding needs to be added
> to hotspot's Unix/Posix vm.make files.
Yes, it was missed because it's already there prior to this patch in the
9 and up HotSpot build which is quite
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8189761
Webrev(s):
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/hotspot/
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/jdk/
https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8189761/root/
This backport is largely clean, bar fuzzing, for the
On 21/03/2019 15:49, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> I don't think anyone has tried. Just removing the check in configure
> should be simple enough, but I suspect there will be lots of follow-on
> issues.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2019-03-21 03:05, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the Mac experts will
On 19/03/2019 15:09, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Probably it's because glibc deprecated readdir, and we don't have
> --disable-warnings-as-errors by default?
>
> (I think warnings should not be errors except as opt-in by openjdk
> developers/maintainers)
I agree, and we've implemented it that way
On 19/03/2019 15:09, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Probably it's because glibc deprecated readdir, and we don't have
> --disable-warnings-as-errors by default?
>
> (I think warnings should not be errors except as opt-in by openjdk
> developers/maintainers)
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 7:47 AM Andrew
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193764
Webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8193764/webrev.01/
This one applies pretty much as-is, when adjustments are made to use the
jdk-options.m4 file rather than jdk-version.m4, which doesn't exist in
8u. generated-configure.sh
On 14/03/2019 15:31, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Looks good to me.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2019-03-13 17:27, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
>>
>> Forwarded Message
>> Subject: [RFR] 8217753: Enable HotSpot build
On 14/03/2019 15:32, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Looks good.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2019-03-13 17:27, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>> Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
>>
>> Forwarded Message
>> Subject: [RFR] 8220397: JDK-8036003 backport reg
Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
Forwarded Message
Subject: [RFR] 8220397: JDK-8036003 backport regresses no_strip builds
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 07:33:16 +
From: Andrew John Hughes
To: 'jdk8u-...@openjdk.java.net'
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK
Forwarding to build-dev for wider review.
Forwarded Message
Subject: [RFR] 8217753: Enable HotSpot builds on 5.x Linux kernels
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 07:24:48 +
From: Andrew John Hughes
To: 'jdk8u-...@openjdk.java.net'
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217753
On 10:41 Wed 04 Jan , Andrew Haley wrote:
On 01/04/2012 06:16 AM, John Von Seggern wrote:
Way back in a bug report for Java 1.4, I found this note:
We statically link the C++ runtime in JDK and enabled linker script
to hide symbols from libstdc++ and other internal symbols.
On 20:43 Wed 04 Jan , John Von Seggern wrote:
Kelly,
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question. This information is
very helpful.
So in general, doing static linking is a bad idea and should not be done
lightly, if ever.
The most obvious issue for me is security. If a
On 09:11 Wed 09 Nov , Florian Weimer wrote:
* Srinivas Ramakrishna:
Sorry for a rather naive question. I am building openjdk (6) from
scratch for the first time and am running into an issue when building
the AWT classes because of not finding the relevant Motif header files
at the
On 14:28 Fri 14 Oct , fredrik.ohrst...@oracle.com wrote:
Changeset: 984f119f2ea7
Author:ohrstrom
Date: 2011-10-14 16:36 +0200
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/build-infra/jdk7/rev/984f119f2ea7
Jaxws actually depends on jaxp, this becomes obvious when compiling
with a boot
On 13:52 Wed 12 Oct , Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
2011/10/12 Dr Andrew John Hughes ahug...@redhat.com:
FWIW, I recently did exactly that in IcedTea because I'm sick of all the
problems this drop solution causes.
This has cut things down from needing five tarballs (jaxp + jaxws
On 18:25 Wed 03 Aug , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
FYI...
If you are interested in the jdk8 build infrastructure changes coming down
the pipe, I invite you
to join the build-infra-dev alias:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-infra-dev/2011-August/29.html
I expect this work
On 16:02 Mon 01 Aug , Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
On 08/01/2011 02:55 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 11:07 Mon 01 Aug , Alexandre Boulgakov wrote:
Hello Kelly,
Do you know the answer to this one?
Thanks,
Sasha
On 7/29/2011 11:37 AM, Alexandre Boulgakov wrote:
Hello
On 15:02 Thu 28 Jul , Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:32 -0400, Keith McGuigan wrote:
This appears to remove support for version 2.7. Is that intentional?
There has never been a 2.7 kernel.
2.6.39.3 is the last before the 3.0 series.
On 09:17 Thu 28 Jul , Keith McGuigan wrote:
Ok, thanks. Code looks good to me then.
Ok, can I push this or do you still need to do this via JPRT?
Either way, I need a bug ID please.
--
- Keith
On Jul 28, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 08:32
Hi,
Can someone please tell me why:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/cf4edfcd7119
reverted my earlier fix:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/80368890a2a0
without any discussion?
The correct fix would have been to bump the boot source language/target class
versions to 7,
On 11:58 Wed 27 Jul , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Hi,
Can someone please tell me why:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/cf4edfcd7119
reverted my earlier fix:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev
On 17:12 Wed 27 Jul , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 4:28 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 11:58 Wed 27 Jul , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Jul 27, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
Hi,
Can someone please tell me why:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net
On 11:24 Sun 10 Jul , Erik Trimble wrote:
Folks,
PPC isn't a currently supported architecture for OpenJDK - that is, no
one has contributed any code to support it. I do know of several
proprietary ports, but that doesn't help. :-) I don't even remember the
last time it was
On 09:59 Wed 15 Jun , Andrew Haley wrote:
On 14/06/11 22:22, Sebastian Sickelmann wrote:
i had done a contribution to openjdk7 and remembered it was very
hard to setup all the build thinks. Now a want to make some new
contributions and i struggle again with the build setup. How about
On 08:57 Fri 03 Jun , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
The documented Boot JDK to be used when building JDK7 repositories is JDK6
Update 18, as listed here
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#MBE
However, as many people know, JDK releases newer than JDK6u18
On 13:11 Fri 20 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
We now have a Build Infrastructure project!
Register for email at:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/build-infra-dev
The repos will be at:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/build-infra/jdk7
But I haven't been able to populate
On 07:20 Fri 20 May , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 05/20/11 06:24:
On 09:47 Thu 19 May , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 05/19/11 05:29:
On 08:35 Mon 16 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
snip
The -Werror option
On 16:12 Fri 20 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On May 20, 2011, at 3:36 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 13:11 Fri 20 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
We now have a Build Infrastructure project!
Register for email at:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/build-infra-dev
On 10:32 Thu 19 May , Alan Bateman wrote:
David Holmes wrote:
:
In contrast, there are basically two Java compilers in general use
(javac and ecj)
and one is part of OpenJDK. Yet, the Java code does not have -Werror
enabled by default and there
are a mass of warnings there as
On 07:25 Mon 16 May , Erik Trimble wrote:
On 5/16/2011 6:03 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 05/16/2011 12:08 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
The reason I'm asking is that I'm wondering if this is something we
should expect to crop up in different parts of the code base, or
whether it's a one
On 17:32 Tue 10 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I'm a little reluctant to accept this, I'm not sure what the full
ramifications are.
But I think we want it.
Is this in OpenJDK6 now?
OpenJDK6 changes have to go through 7 first, so no. But it's been in IcedTea6
since
before there were
On 15:31 Wed 11 May , bhavesh.pa...@sun.com wrote:
Changeset: 42c22d5a2cd0
Author:bpatel
Date: 2011-05-11 08:30 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/jdk/rev/42c22d5a2cd0
7043684: Update man pages for JDK 7 tools
Reviewed-by: skannan
!
On 21:09 Wed 11 May , Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
Omair,
CR 7043921 . It need someone from jdk team to integrate it.
Omair has commit rights so he can just push it now.
--
Andrew :)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU
On 18:14 Wed 04 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On May 4, 2011, at 5:42 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
7042040: Remove disk space sanity check
Ok, if
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/sync/webrev.02/
looks ok, I'll push it to the build tree.
Files:
jdk/make
in the solaris case.
The accuracy gained by using --sync is probably not worth the
performance loss caused by flushing disk buffers.
The patch was originally written by Andrew John Hughes
(ahug...@redhat.com) and we have had this in icedtea6 for almost a year now.
Thanks,
Omair
Let's see if you do
On 15:37 Wed 04 May , David Katleman wrote:
Would be interesting to know the original objection to Andrew's change
last year.
If there was one, it never reached me either publicly or otherwise.
The archives show no responses.
Absent that, I see no reason this could not be removed and
On 16:27 Wed 04 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I agree we should toss the check.
I'll need a bug ID for this.
7042040: Remove disk space sanity check
Ok, if
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/sync/webrev.02/
looks ok, I'll push it to the build tree.
-kto
--
Andrew :)
On 09:23 Mon 02 May , Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
Thanks!
But I am of the strong opinion that the jaxp and jaxws source code should be
committed into the jaxp/jaxws repositories when drops are made.
//Fredrik
+1
--
Andrew :)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.
On 08:40 Mon 02 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
There has been a request for essentially that, more transparency on these
sources.
The downloads are also painful, I know.
The issue with these sources is that they are effectively 'generated
sources', transformed
from master sources
On 14:27 Wed 27 Apr , Frédéric Le Mouël wrote:
cd linux_i486_compiler1/product ./test_gamma
java full version 1.6.0_24-b07
Using java runtime at: /opt/sun-jdk-1.6.0.24/jre
java version 1.6.0_24
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_24-b07)
^^^ This bit isn't OpenJDK.
--
Andrew
Is it necessary to have all these posted to build-dev? There doesn't
seem to be any work going on, just merging as far as I can see. Shouldn't
this be on its own deploy-dev list? As far as I'm aware, the deploy team
don't do any OpenJDK work anyway.
On 01:30 Wed 09 Mar ,
On 14:33 Thu 21 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
This started out as an annoyance around the use of -Wno-clobber on Linux when
the gcc might
not support it. Turned into fixing several CC_VER checks in the makefiles:
7038711: Fix CC_VER checks for compiler options, fix use of -Wno-clobber
On 15:14 Fri 15 Apr , Phil Race wrote:
For jpeg its something we could consider for JDK 8 although I think its been
called libjpeg since JDK 1.0 without apparent problems.
But you use an in-tree libjpeg (at least at present).
Having the option of linking against a system libjpeg at compile
On 11:41 Tue 19 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I imagine there are probably hundreds of variable names that if set in the
environment,
could impact the build, on purpose or by accident :^(.
We do check for JAVA_HOME and LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Is JAVAC some kind of typical or standard
On 18:03 Sat 16 Apr , luxInteg wrote:
snip...
What kind of Linux is this?
This is blfs linux built by compiling sources from scratch.
BLFS has instructions on building IcedTea6 which uses OpenJDK6 here:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/cvs/general/icedtea6.html
--
Andrew :)
On 16:18 Tue 12 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Apr 12, 2011, at 3:58 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 13:46 Tue 12 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Some shared libraries do not have and will not have mapfiles, at least for
now, we
give these an exception to the mapfile check
On 13:46 Tue 12 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Some shared libraries do not have and will not have mapfiles, at least for
now, we
give these an exception to the mapfile check (which just issues a warning).
7033957: Library built without a mapfile: libxinerama.so
On 08:50 Wed 06 Apr , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Just an FYI...
Anyone working with C/C++ should be well aware of the functions we should be
avoiding:
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+security/funclist
Microsoft has used the term banned and has a much more extensive
On 20:15 Thu 31 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/31/11 06:31:
On 09:42 Wed 30 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
This change (arrived at by both myself and Gary Benson separately):
http
On 09:42 Wed 30 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
This change (arrived at by both myself and Gary Benson separately):
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gbenson/zero-shark-fixes-04-1/
fixes the issue by adding Shark back into the mix
On 08:43 Tue 15 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Mar 15, 2011, at 2:05 AM, Steve Poole wrote:
A singular process that everyone uses? Good Luck with that. I think that
is called herding cats. :^)
Sorry, I've been doing this too long, if there is a variation on doing
development
On 07:59 Wed 16 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Hi Andrew,
See inline ...
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/16/11 07:43:
On 18:05 Tue 15 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
BUILD_CLIENT_ONLY:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/jdk-bco/webrev/
Provides support for building
/2011 4:48 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 18:32 Tue 08 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
First, if we talk about the mercurial forests, it has nothing to do with
the Mercurial Forest Extension.
What we really have is a set of nested repositories, sometimes called our
forest
On 06:40 Fri 11 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Fredrik Öhrström said the following on 03/10/11 20:22:
I think it is important that a recent stock mercurial install
can check out the full openjdk with a single clone
command.
I.e. you should not have to install special extensions just
On 17:35 Thu 10 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/10/11 10:26:
On 22:09 Wed 09 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
My original reply does not seem to have made it to build-dev.
I've updated the webrev again to accommodate openjdk builds that set
On 09:33 Wed 09 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Andrew,
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/09/11 03:24:
On 10:51 Tue 08 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Just to clarify for people, BUILD_CLIENT_ONLY refers to building the
client VM only.
Some of these variables should
On 18:32 Tue 08 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
First, if we talk about the mercurial forests, it has nothing to do with the
Mercurial Forest Extension.
What we really have is a set of nested repositories, sometimes called our
forest of repositories.
This email is just about the actual
On 10:51 Tue 08 Mar , David Holmes wrote:
Andrew,
Many thanks for the feedback:
Dr Andrew John Hughes said the following on 03/08/11 04:30:
On 09:39 Mon 07 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
General comments:
* Could this not be broken up into smaller changesets to make it easier
On 09:39 Mon 07 Mar , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
General comments:
* Could this not be broken up into smaller changesets to make it easier to
review and catch regressions?
* There seem to be some whitespace changes that shouldn't be there.
e.g.
- sane-msvcrt_path \
+ sane-msvcrt_path
On 17:28 Wed 23 Feb , Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 08:26 Tue 22 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:42 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 12:54 Tue 22 Feb , Alan Bateman wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man
On 08:26 Tue 22 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:42 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 12:54 Tue 22 Feb , Alan Bateman wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man page for javaws,
yet there is no javaws implementation
On 00:00 Tue 22 Feb , Bradford Wetmore wrote:
Kelly just wrote:
It's not clear...and slightly augmented by the openjdk bugzilla.
I think Andrew was referring to http://bugs.openjdk.java.net.
I was. I'm not sure what else the phrase OpenJDK bug database
would refer
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man page for javaws,
yet there is no javaws implementation in OpenJDK.
http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=633
This only happens on 32-bit platforms, hence why I've never seen it
myself. I've posted a webrev:
On 12:54 Tue 22 Feb , Alan Bateman wrote:
Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
It seems that the OpenJDK build installs a man page for javaws,
yet there is no javaws implementation in OpenJDK.
http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=633
This only happens on 32-bit
On 18:29 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 18, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
snip
But there have been some roadblocks for the open source community.
It has been observed (for a long time now
On 18:08 Mon 21 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
snip
So this is going to be yet another system? What will happen to the
existing
pretty much unused OpenJDK bug database?
It's not clear. The old Sun bugtraq system
On 18:26 Mon 21 Feb , Brad Wetmore wrote:
Definitely. Making OpenJDK bug DB IDs usable in changesets would be
a good start (probably involves jcheck...)
I'll have to punt on that, someone else is working on it, but the
intent is to have a
completely open bug tracking system that
On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Excuse the long email, sometimes it can't be avoided.
I much prefer long e-mails, especially ones with good news like this,
to things happening behind closed doors :-)
I've been asked to try and start up some discussions around how the
OpenJDK
On 16:38 Thu 10 Feb , Gary Meyer wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:48 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Build folk,
The following fix should make it possible to (again) build langtools on a
Mac.
Dan Smith reports:
- When building the GenStubs in OS X, the Java 6 tools classes are
On 07:57 Fri 11 Feb , Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
On 02/11/2011 07:09 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 16:38 Thu 10 Feb , Gary Meyer wrote:
On Feb 9, 2011, at 6:48 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Build folk,
The following fix should make it possible to (again) build langtools
1 - 100 of 264 matches
Mail list logo
