Re: RFR: JDK-8166648,,jib make run-test for langtools results in intermittent failures on windows-x86

On 10/10/2016 6:53 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, The variable ARCH_DATA_MODEL is not initialized anywhere. I know JPRT sets it, but I don't think we should rely on that. ./autoconf/buildjdk-spec.gmk.in:ARCH_DATA_MODEL := $(OPENJDK_BUILD_CPU_BITS) David /Erik On 2016-10-08 03:34, Tim

Re: RFR: JDK-8161025: GPL header missing comma in year

Looks good. Thanks, David On 5/10/2016 9:54 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Please review this fix of the copyright header in two makefiles, adding the missing comma after the year. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161018 Top level patch: diff -r 278f9a9e9329

Re: RFR: JDK-8150736: Excessive disk space used by build system

On 3/10/2016 6:22 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, On 2016-10-01 14:13, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, This is a big change that is hard to digest. I assume the actual images themselves are unaffected by this change? I understand that and I have been working on this for some time

Re: RFR: JDK-8164120: The minimal VM should be stripped using --strip-unneeded

Hi Erik, On 3/10/2016 11:53 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: (adding hotspot-dev) On 2016-10-03 15:52, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, Please review this small change, which adds --strip-unneeded when stripping the minimal VM on Linux, which reduces size on x86 builds with around 1.2MB. Bug:

Re: RFR for JDK-8165482 java in ldoms, with cpu-arch=generic has problems

Hi Martin, On 30/09/2016 8:03 PM, Martin Walsh wrote: On 23/09/2016 14:34, Martin Walsh wrote: On 20/09/2016 08:42, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, On 2016-09-20 03:28, David Holmes wrote: Hi Martin, Build changes must be reviewed by the build team - now cc'd Thanks for forwarding David, I

Re: RFR: JDK-8150736: Excessive disk space used by build system

Hi Erik, This is a big change that is hard to digest. I assume the actual images themselves are unaffected by this change? An initial nit - why use "product-" in the target names? "images-jdk" etc seems perfectly sufficient, and "product" may be a misnomer. Thanks, David On 30/09/2016

Re: RFR: 8166790: Add stress test GCBasher

On 29/09/2016 5:52 PM, Erik Helin wrote: On 2016-09-29, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, Hi David, thanks for reviewing! On 29/09/2016 1:01 AM, Erik Helin wrote: Hi all, this patch adds a new GC stress test called GCBasher. GCBasher builds up large (well, for some definiton of large) object

Re: RFR: 8166790: Add stress test GCBasher

Hi Erik, On 29/09/2016 1:01 AM, Erik Helin wrote: Hi all, this patch adds a new GC stress test called GCBasher. GCBasher builds up large (well, for some definiton of large) object graphs by figuring out the relations between classes in the JDK. The test usually stresses the GC quite a lot,

Re: (8u) RFR: 8152000: Java FlightRecorder does not run on Java 8 compact 3 profile since u65

Thanks Erik. David On 27/09/2016 6:08 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Looks good. /Erik On 2016-09-27 02:02, David Holmes wrote: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152000 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8152000/webrev/ This is a small adjustment to the build of compact

Re: (8u) RFR: 8152000: Java FlightRecorder does not run on Java 8 compact 3 profile since u65

Thanks Erik. David On 27/09/2016 6:18 PM, Erik Gahlin wrote: Looks good Erik Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152000 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8152000/webrev/ This is a small adjustment to the build of compact profiles to allow a useful but unsupported

(8u) RFR: 8152000: Java FlightRecorder does not run on Java 8 compact 3 profile since u65

Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152000 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8152000/webrev/ This is a small adjustment to the build of compact profiles to allow a useful but unsupported configuration to continue to work after it stopped working in 8u60. We simply move

Re: RFR for JDK-8165482 java in ldoms, with cpu-arch=generic has problems

Hi Martin, Build changes must be reviewed by the build team - now cc'd On 20/09/2016 12:16 AM, Martin Walsh wrote: Could I get a code review for the following bug: JDK-8165482 java in ldoms, with cpu-arch=generic has problems Webrev of the changes is available here:

Re: RFR: JDK-8166202: Tracefile gensrc cannot handle closed src dir in different location

Hi Erik, On 17/09/2016 12:51 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: The xml/xsl source files used to generate sources for trace in hotspot have hard coded relative paths in them that make assumptions on where the oracle closed files are located. The source files should not make these kind of assumptions

Re: [9] RFR[XS] 8166096: variable tracking size limit exceeded in jvmciCompilerToVM.cpp

On 17/09/2016 11:17 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166096 +++ b/make/lib/JvmOverrideFiles.gmkFri Sep 16 18:14:06 2016 -0700 @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ ifeq ($(TOOLCHAIN_TYPE), gcc) BUILD_LIBJVM_vmStructs.cpp_CXXFLAGS := -fno-var-tracking-assignments -O0 +

Re: [patch] fix compiler flag for linux sparc targets

On 5/09/2016 9:33 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Patch looks ok. To my knowledge, nobody is actively keeping linux-sparc working in 9, so I would expect it to be broken. It is not a listed platform for 9 or 8 (not even listed as known to be broken):

Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target

Hi Severin, Matthias, On 5/09/2016 10:16 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote: On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:03 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64- linux-gnux32 target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk. - the build system

Re: Tool to create OpenJDK compact profiles for x86_64 platform

On 2/09/2016 5:39 PM, David Holmes wrote: On 2/09/2016 3:44 PM, Waldek Kozaczuk wrote: During my research about OpenJDK 8 compact profiles I found out it is almost close to impossible to find pre-built images of those profiles for x86_64 platform. Understandable as the primary use-case

Re: RFR: JDK-8164402 key word 'requires' appearing in comment causing a build failure

Hi Tim, Fix seems reasonable but this seems a rather crude way to determine dependencies. Thanks, David On 19/08/2016 4:05 PM, Tim Bell wrote: Hello Earlier today a javadoc change surprised us by causing JDK 9 builds to fail on all platforms, due to a modules 'requires' statement error.

Re: RFR: JDK-8164297: Jtreg test exeinvoke fails to link on Ubuntu

On 18/08/2016 9:15 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-08-18 12:51, David Holmes wrote: Sorry missed this. Resending reply ... On 18/08/2016 6:14 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: (Resending with proper subject) On 2016-08-18 10:11, Erik Joelsson wrote: Thank you, Here is a request for review

Re: RFR: JDK-8164297: Jtreg test exeinvoke fails to link on Ubuntu

Sorry missed this. Resending reply ... On 18/08/2016 6:14 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: (Resending with proper subject) On 2016-08-18 10:11, Erik Joelsson wrote: Thank you, Here is a request for review on that change. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8164297/webrev.01/ Bug:

Re: strange error when running jtreg tests

Hi Erik, On 18/08/2016 6:11 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Thank you, Here is a request for review on that change. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8164297/webrev.01/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8164297 Fix seems to work, as reported, but why do we have:

Re: strange error when running jtreg tests

On 16/08/2016 8:41 AM, Gustavo Romero wrote: Hi, I observed the same issue on Ubuntu 16.04 but not on RHEL 7.2. RHEL 7.2: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/409005/raw/ Ubuntu 16.04: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/409004/raw/ I checked on PPC64 LE arch (Ubuntu 16.04 and RHEL 7.2, logs above).

Re: strange error when running jtreg tests

On 13/08/2016 12:50 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: On 12/08/16 14:12, David Holmes wrote: On 12/08/2016 11:06 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: Hi, I've encountered this error when running jtreg tests from make using the following command line make test JT_HOME= TEST=jdk_util * For target

Re: strange error when running jtreg tests

On 12/08/2016 11:06 PM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: Hi, I've encountered this error when running jtreg tests from make using the following command line make test JT_HOME= TEST=jdk_util * For target support_test_hotspot_jtreg_native_support_exeinvoke_BUILD_TEST_invoke_link:

Re: RFR: JDK-8069540: Remove universal binaries support from hotspot build

Hi Erik, On 9/08/2016 2:04 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, The hotspot native libraries on macosx are currently being packaged as "universal binaries" (while all other libraries and executables are not). There seems to be no point in doing so since we only build for one architecture anyway. I

Re: RFR: JDK-8163102: Fix headless only configuration option

failed. libawt.so still requires X11 headers to compile. I suppose we could differentiate between headers and libs being available, but I will leave that for another time. Ok. On 2016-08-03 22:37, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, The confusion around that variable due to its legacy always makes me

Re: RFR: JDK-8163102: Fix headless only configuration option

Hi Erik, On 4/08/2016 1:04 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, The current --disable-headful option is weird. Even worse, it doesn't work since the makefiles still uses the legacy BUILD_HEADLESS_ONLY variable, which configure never touches. The confusion around that variable due to its legacy

Re: RFR: JDK-8162354: Unable to build JDK 9 on a Sparc T7-1 with default boot-jdk 8.0

: On 2016-08-03 04:20, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, On 3/08/2016 1:11 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, The default bootjdk for 9 is JDK 8. Unfortunately JDK 8 does not work on newer M7 sparc hardware. This has of course been fixed in an update. This patch changes the Jib profile configuration

Re: RFR: JDK-8162354: Unable to build JDK 9 on a Sparc T7-1 with default boot-jdk 8.0

On 3/08/2016 2:43 AM, joe darcy wrote: Hi Erik, In general, I think it is reasonable to update the boot JDK from JDK 8 GA. However, I think this would be reasonable to do across platforms rather than just for Solaris. It is only being done when running on M7 hardware, so a very small subset

Re: RFR: JDK-8162354: Unable to build JDK 9 on a Sparc T7-1 with default boot-jdk 8.0

Hi Erik, On 3/08/2016 1:11 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, The default bootjdk for 9 is JDK 8. Unfortunately JDK 8 does not work on newer M7 sparc hardware. This has of course been fixed in an update. This patch changes the Jib profile configuration to use 8u102 as bootjdk on Solaris sparc if

Re: RFR(XXS): 8149519: Investigate implementation of java.specification.version

+1 from me. Does the Verona JEP say anything about this? I certainly do not expect the specification version number of differ from the major release number. David On 26/07/2016 10:26 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: This looks right but I'm curious why it was initially implemented to use

Re: hg: jdk9/dev: 8160873: (cs) JDK9 Build failure on Hindi locale

Thanks Tim! Much appreciated. David On 23/07/2016 2:07 AM, Tim Bell wrote: On 07/22/16 08:37, Tim Bell wrote: I will also file a bug against the check in make/Init.gmk which is supposed to notice this. The generated-configure.sh files (open and closed) have been updated. I also filed

Re: hg: jdk9/dev: 8160873: (cs) JDK9 Build failure on Hindi locale

This change failed to regenerate and check-in the open (and closed) generated-configure.sh files! David On 22/07/2016 2:47 AM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote: Changeset: a3f2a1723e75 Author:naoto Date: 2016-07-21 09:47 -0700 URL:

Re: RFR(XS) 8161915: Linking gtestLauncher may end up linking with non-gtest libjvm

Hi Mikael, On 20/07/2016 11:54 PM, Mikael Gerdin wrote: Hi all, Please review this small fix to work around a problem where incremental builds of hotspot would fail due to the symbol runUnitTests missing. The cause for the problem is that the unit tests launcher linker command line contains a

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

On 12/07/2016 1:40 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - Catching up ... On 11/07/2016 7:05 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - On Jul 8, 2016, at 2:38 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, This looks good except for the change in

Re: Enable hotspot builds for 4.x Linux kernels.

Hi Jeremy, On 11/07/2016 6:10 PM, Jeremy Whiting wrote: Hi, Last week I started the process to build jdk8 using a Fedora 23 environment. Followed the detailed instructions but came across an issue. Looking at the bugs database identical issues have been raised for various components [1] and

Re: [RFR] JDK-8156980: Hotspot build doesn't have -std=gnu++98 gcc option

Catching up ... On 11/07/2016 7:05 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - On Jul 8, 2016, at 2:38 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, This looks good except for the change in toolchain.m4, which looks like it might actually break cross compilation by

Re: RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

No further comments from me Erik! Looks good. Thanks, David On 5/07/2016 4:44 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8003593/webrev.02/ Only change is the name of the suppress variable. On 2016-07-04 03:02, David Holmes wrote: Fix typo ... On 4/07

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

SS_CUSTOMIZATIONS instead of SUPPRESS_CUSTOM_SOURCES ? David - Phil It is mostly just different internal code as far as we (se client) are concerned so the word extension has entirely the wrong connotation for people in SE api land. -Phil. On Jul 3, 2016, at 4:01 PM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>

Re: Status of building problem with GCC 6

Please include the build team on this discussion - cc'd Thanks, David On 4/07/2016 2:36 AM, Kim Barrett wrote: On Jul 1, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Kim Barrett wrote: On Jul 1, 2016, at 10:17 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: For HotSpot, I think JDK-8156980

Re: RFR: JDK-8160722: Module summary generation fails on Windows 32bit

On 2/07/2016 12:07 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, Again we are hit with a build problem involving -Xmx and only building server on Windows 32bit. The module summary generation build step is run on the just built jdk (just like a bootcycle build). Now we face a similar issue with this summary

Re: RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

Fix typo ... On 4/07/2016 9:01 AM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, On 2/07/2016 3:47 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: The separation between OpenJDK and Oracle's closed additions have historically been quite messy. The build-infra project has tried to improve on this, but failed in one regard, which

Re: RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

Hi Erik, On 2/07/2016 3:47 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: The separation between OpenJDK and Oracle's closed additions have historically been quite messy. The build-infra project has tried to improve on this, but failed in one regard, which was to hard code all references to "closed" source instead

Re: RFR: JDK-8003593: build-infra: Paths to optional platform-specific files should not be hardwired to src/closed

On 2/07/2016 4:16 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-07-01 19:59, Phil Race wrote: erik, SUPPRESS_CUSTOM_SOURCE" FWIW "CLOSED" implies better to me what this is about than "CUSTOM". Can't this be SUPPRESS_CLOSED_SOURCE ? "custom" is a term that we have been using for a while now instead of

Re: CoreServices/CoreServices.h problem building JDK 9 for IOS

Moving to mobile-dev list David On 2/07/2016 8:50 AM, Bits2Order wrote: Resending, my apologies if this is a duplicate. I’ve been trying to build JDK 9 for IOS following these instructions . I’ve set LOG=debug when I build to get as much

Re: Status of building problem with GCC 6

cc'ing build-dev - don't understand why they are not part of this. The build team now owns the hotspot build. Unfortunately Erik J. is now on vacation for a couple of weeks. David On 2/07/2016 5:13 AM, Kim Barrett wrote: On Jul 1, 2016, at 10:17 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga

Re: RFR: JDK-8160285: Bootcycle builds are broken on jdk9/hs for windows i586

On 28/06/2016 9:58 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-06-28 13:50, David Holmes wrote: On 28/06/2016 7:40 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-06-28 06:30, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, This may coincide with the switch from the client VM to server VM on 32-bit Windows. That is a very likely

Re: RFR: JDK-8160285: Bootcycle builds are broken on jdk9/hs for windows i586

On 28/06/2016 7:40 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-06-28 06:30, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, This may coincide with the switch from the client VM to server VM on 32-bit Windows. That is a very likely cause. Fix looks fine to me. Thanks! But after leaving work yesterday I thought some

Re: RFR: JDK-8160285: Bootcycle builds are broken on jdk9/hs for windows i586

Hi Erik, On 28/06/2016 1:57 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, When doing a bootcycle build for a 32bit target, but using a 64bit bootjdk, the JVM memory arguments found suitable for the 64bit bootjdk are still used when running the bootcycle part of the build. When using a 32bit bootjdk, we

Re: build failing on Mac

On 18/06/2016 10:20 AM, Pete Brunet wrote: I haven't done a full build in around a month, but just pulled (tpull -u) / cleaned / reconfigured and got this on my Mac: Did you update Xcode in that month? David ... Creating gtestLauncher from 1 file(s) error: unknown warning option

Re: RFR 8144278 [TESTBUG] hotspot/runtime/StackGuardPages/testme.sh should use native library build support

Hi Jerry, On 11/06/2016 2:16 AM, Gerald Thornbrugh wrote: Hi Everyone, I have address Erik's, Dmitry's and David's concerns in a new webrev: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144278 JDK Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~gthornbr/8144278/jdk-webrev.01/

Re: Issue 8152856 Xcode 7.3 -Wshift-negative-value compile failure on Mac OS X, Still not fixed

On 11/06/2016 10:49 AM, Scott Palmer wrote: Release notes for 9u122-ea indicate: 50b6bc2ac9e5 8152856 Xcode 7.3 -Wshift-negative-value compile failure on Mac

Re: RFR: JDK-8159047: Disable redundant build steps when creating buildjdk

Hi Erik, This seems good. Though it does seem to me that whole BUILJDK things is rather complex! Great to see that truncated classfile problem tracked down though! Thanks, David On 8/06/2016 10:01 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, When creating the buildjdk (when cross compiling), the idea

Re: RFR(XS): 8158763 : --disable-hotspot-gtest not working on Solaris

Pushing to jdk9/hs under the "trivial - 1 Reviewer" rule David On 7/06/2016 5:07 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 4:28 AM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote: Hi Volker, On 6/06/2016 11:59 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: Hi, I'd like to get the follow

Re: RFR(S): 8158938: AIX: some more new hotspot build fixes

Looks good to me too! David On 8/06/2016 2:19 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Looks good to me. I will sponsor. /Erik On 2016-06-07 18:14, Volker Simonis wrote: Hi, can I please have a review for the following two (top-level and hotspot) AIX-only changes:

Re: RFR: JDK-8158535: Configure script uses basic tools directly in many places

On 7/06/2016 9:04 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, On 2016-06-06 01:36, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, On 4/06/2016 1:56 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: In the configure script we check for the presence of several basic tools, like grep, sed, echo etc, and assign variables for them. In the makefiles

Re: RFR(S): 8154209: Remove client VM from default JIB profile on windows-x86 and linux-x86

and similar time as before my fix. Leonid On 27.05.2016 01:09, David Holmes wrote: Hi Leonid, On 27/05/2016 5:00 AM, Leonid Mesnik wrote: Dear All Please find updated webrev for this fix here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lmesnik/8154209/webrev.00/hotspot/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Elmes

Re: RFR(XS): 8158763 : --disable-hotspot-gtest not working on Solaris

Hi Volker, On 6/06/2016 11:59 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: Hi, I'd like to get the following tiny bug fix into jdk9-dev. What's the current procedure to get this change approved? No approvals needed for bug fixes until RDP1 later in the year. Only enhancements need approval post FC and that

Re: RFR: JDK-8158535: Configure script uses basic tools directly in many places

Hi Erik, On 4/06/2016 1:56 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: In the configure script we check for the presence of several basic tools, like grep, sed, echo etc, and assign variables for them. In the makefiles we are very diligent with always using the tools through these variables to make sure we have a

Re: RFR 8144278 [TESTBUG] hotspot/runtime/StackGuardPages/testme.sh should use native library build support

Hi Jerry, Some additional comments to those you are already working on ... On 3/06/2016 1:28 AM, Gerald Thornbrugh wrote: Hi Everyone, Please review my changes to address JDK-8144278. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144278 JDK Webrev:

Re: RFR: JDK-8158540: Open only linux-x86 builds using Jib fails when building "minimal" jvm

Erik, On 3/06/2016 1:49 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, when enabling the minimal jvm to be built for OracleJDK linux-x86 builds, that change also enabled minimal to be built for our open only profile. The problem is, this configuration doesn't currently work. This patch restores the open only

Re: RFR(S): 8154209: Remove client VM from default JIB profile on windows-x86 and linux-x86

Hi Leonid, On 27/05/2016 5:00 AM, Leonid Mesnik wrote: Dear All Please find updated webrev for this fix here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lmesnik/8154209/webrev.00/hotspot/

Re: 回复： 回复： 回复： 回复： An issue of building openjre

if these [ERROR] are real errors. Regards, Rong -- -- *??:* "David Holmes";<david.hol...@oracle.com>; *:* 2016??5??12??(??) 10:21 *??:* ""<31731...@qq.com>; "build-dev"<build-dev@openjdk.java.ne

Re: RFR: JDK-8157336: Generation of classlists at build time should be configurable

Hi Erik, On 24/05/2016 11:28 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Generating a classlist at build time is not supported on all JVM configurations. This patch adds a configure flag to control this build step: --disable-generate-classlist. The default is to be enabled if either a client or server JVM Variant

Re: RFR: 8157325: gtest tests are not excluded for minimal builds

to the unit tests. /Erik On 2016-05-19 14:03, David Holmes wrote: Sorry Erik but I don't follow what this patch is doing - not familiar with how gtest actually works. Where does the minimal build come into what has been changed? This seems to be changing how GTEST_LIBJVM is built, not when it is built

Re: RFR: 8157325: gtest tests are not excluded for minimal builds

Sorry Erik but I don't follow what this patch is doing - not familiar with how gtest actually works. Where does the minimal build come into what has been changed? This seems to be changing how GTEST_LIBJVM is built, not when it is built ?? Thanks, David On 19/05/2016 8:44 PM, Erik Helin

Re: 回复： 回复： 回复： An issue of building openjre on CentOS 5.9

is ld and running on a very old version of Linux. See this email from 2011: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/mlvm-dev/2011-May/003092.html David -- -- *??:* "David Holmes";<david.hol...@oracle.com>; *:* 2016??5??11??(

Re: 回复： 回复： An issue of building openjre on CentOS 5.9

. David -- -- *??:* "David Holmes";<david.hol...@oracle.com>; *:* 2016??5??11??(??) 3:17 *??:* ""<31731...@qq.com>; "build-dev"<build-dev@openjdk.java.net>; *:* Re: ?? An

Re: 回复： An issue of building openjre on CentOS 5.9

y] Error 2 I think if there is newer linking tool ld44 like gcc44 and g++44 but I cannot find it. Do you have any suggestion? -- -- *??:* "David Holmes";<david.hol...@oracle.com>; *:* 20

Re: RFR: JDK-8155587: Cross compilation may cause compiler warnings for "build" compiler

Hi Erik, Seems reasonable. flags.m4 is okay, but the toolchain.m4 changes stretch my comprehension of the overall process. As long as this gets through jprt with -testset hotspot, then I'm fine with it. :) Thanks, David On 11/05/2016 2:41 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, When cross

Re: An issue of building openjre on CentOS 5.9

On 11/05/2016 11:56 AM, 31731705 wrote: Can anybody help me to check this compile error? OS is CentOS 5.9 [root@localhost openjdk]# uname -a Linux localhost.localdomain

Re: RFR(S): 8155950: Add minimal VM in JIB profile on linux-x86

Thanks, David Leonid On 04.05.2016 13:23, David Holmes wrote: On 4/05/2016 7:01 PM, Leonid Mesnik wrote: David On 04.05.2016 11:40, David Holmes wrote: On 4/05/2016 4:43 PM, Leonid Mesnik wrote: Please review this small change which adds minimal VM as a part of default JIB profile on linux-x86. T

Re: RFR(S): 8155950: Add minimal VM in JIB profile on linux-x86

On 4/05/2016 4:43 PM, Leonid Mesnik wrote: Please review this small change which adds minimal VM as a part of default JIB profile on linux-x86. The fix also include quick workaround for bug JDK-8155946 . Bug:

Re: small changes, long build time

Hi Erik, On 3/05/2016 1:31 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-05-02 17:18, Pete Brunet wrote: On 4/30/16 2:32 AM, David Holmes wrote: On 30/04/2016 4:18 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 30/04/2016 00:46, Pete Brunet wrote: Even small edits to code in the jdk source tree result in very long time

Re: small changes, long build time

On 30/04/2016 5:53 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 30/04/2016 08:32, David Holmes wrote: Just to add my concerns here, I was changing the launcher and building images and that caused the jmods to be rebuilt as well. I would not expect that so do we have missing dependency information in the build

Re: small changes, long build time

On 30/04/2016 4:18 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 30/04/2016 00:46, Pete Brunet wrote: Even small edits to code in the jdk source tree result in very long time build times now that jigsaw is merged in. Is anyone working on trying to improve that? Is there a workaround? When you touch code in a

Re: Cannot build on OS X 10.11.4

oday and did not see any unexpected differences. FWIW: Have not made any changes to any of the code on the local machine, so this should be a clean build of the 'dev' repo. John Crowley Westport, CT 203-856-2396 On Apr 29, 2016, at 2:42 AM, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com <mailto:david

Re: Cannot build on OS X 10.11.4

On 29/04/2016 7:22 AM, John Crowley wrote: Cannot build JDK 9 on a Mac. This was building successfully about 10 days ago, but since pulling down all new changes, have been getting the failures below. Have tried this over several days, pulling down updates each day with no change. Are you

Re: Urgent (S) RFR: 8155689: Build failing for install on jdk9/dev when using -testset hotspot

Thanks Tim! David On 29/04/2016 3:15 PM, Tim Bell wrote: I'm OK with this due to the urgent nature of the issue. Tim On 04/28/16 20:37, David Holmes wrote: On 29/04/2016 1:19 PM, Jon Masamitsu wrote: David, Change looks good but I'm not part of the infrastructure team. Thanks Jon - me

Re: Urgent (S) RFR: 8155689: Build failing for install on jdk9/dev when using -testset hotspot

On 29/04/2016 1:19 PM, Jon Masamitsu wrote: David, Change looks good but I'm not part of the infrastructure team. Thanks Jon - me neither :) David Jon On 4/28/2016 7:17 PM, David Holmes wrote: Bug report is not public as it relates to issues with our internal jib builds, but the fix

Urgent (S) RFR: 8155689: Build failing for install on jdk9/dev when using -testset hotspot

Bug report is not public as it relates to issues with our internal jib builds, but the fix for this needs a tweak to the open Main.gmk file. This is a follow up to the fix a couple of days ago for JDK-8154841: Let different Jib profiles have different default make targets A side-effect of

Re: RFR: JDK-8155629: MODULES_FILTER should apply to imported modules

On 28/04/2016 10:33 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: We have a mechanism to exclude certain modules completely from a build. This is handled with the MODULES_FILTER variable. It's currently flawed in that it doesn't apply to imported modules (--with-import-modules). Bug:

Re: RFR: JDK-8154841: Let different Jib profiles have different default make targets

or looking it this! On 2016-04-26 14:47, David Holmes wrote: On 26/04/2016 10:01 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: It would be really nice to get this reviewed as I have a lot of further work depending on this feature. I'm not fluent in .js but those changes seemed relatively straight forward to understan

Re: RFR: JDK-8154841: Let different Jib profiles have different default make targets

On 26/04/2016 10:01 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: It would be really nice to get this reviewed as I have a lot of further work depending on this feature. I'm not fluent in .js but those changes seemed relatively straight forward to understand. More so than the rest ... make/Main.gmk Don't

Re: RFR(S): 8154209: Remove client VM from default JIB profile on windows-x86 and linux-x86

On 21/04/2016 7:41 AM, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: Good catch. Updated webrevs here: top: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8154209/webrev.02/webrev/ Minor nit - jib-profiles.js: ! configure_args_32bit: ["--with-target-bits=32", "--with-jvm-variants=server"], I think server

Re: RFR: JDK-8152666: The new Hotspot Build System

On 18/04/2016 5:28 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2016-04-17 12:37, David Holmes wrote: I missed all the fun while I was on vacation and have still not yet had a chance to look at the actual code, but have one query ... Yeah, bad timing, but time was also running out. There is still time

Re: RFR(XS): Bad test for ENABLE_SJAVAC in build-performance.m4

On 18/04/2016 2:47 AM, Omair Majid wrote: Hi, Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8154394 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/8154394-bad-test/00/ I was building OpenJDK 9 as: $ bash ../configure --disable-javac-server And I saw a funny looking message in the

Re: RFR: JDK-8152666: The new Hotspot Build System

I missed all the fun while I was on vacation and have still not yet had a chance to look at the actual code, but have one query ... On 6/04/2016 7:10 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello Dan and thank you for the review! I know it's a lot to chew through. I have incorporated your changes and

Re: RFR: JDK-8151973: Add Jib and JPRT configuration for linux-arm64 open only

Erik, On 16/03/2016 8:10 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, Since we have a community supported Linux aarch64 port, I would like to be able to build it using Jib and JPRT, specifically as part of the new buildinfra testset. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151973 Webrev:

Re: RFR: JDK-8151800: Jib profile for open linux should produce compact profiles images by default

Hi Erik, On 16/03/2016 12:21 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: (note the overloaded use of the word profile in this text) The linux open only Jib profiles are meant to be used for the reference implementation builds. These builds should produce the compact profile images in addition to the normal

Re: RFR: JDK-8151653: Hotspot build does not respect --enable-openjdk-only

es, one for each XML-tag at that level in the XML. /Erik On 2016-03-15 01:46, David Holmes wrote: On 14/03/2016 11:22 AM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, On 12/03/2016 2:31 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, When building hotspot with closed sources present and configuring with --enable-openjdk-

Re: RFR: 8151841: Build needs additional flags to compile with GCC 6

Just a couple of FYIs: 1. hotspot groups require copyright updates on pushes to hotspot forests; other groups do not. Hence many non-hotspot sources have out of date copyrights - these will eventually be fixed en-masse. 2. The CXXFLAGS situation, as alluded, arose out of confusion with the

Re: RFR: JDK-8151653: Hotspot build does not respect --enable-openjdk-only

On 14/03/2016 11:22 AM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Erik, On 12/03/2016 2:31 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, When building hotspot with closed sources present and configuring with --enable-openjdk-only, various closed parts are included in the build anyway, at least on Windows. This needs

Re: RFR: JDK-8151726: Introduce a JPRT testset buildinfra

Seems fine. Thanks, David On 12/03/2016 2:52 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: When verifying build changes, we are currently lacking a good way of doing all relevant builds in one JPRT job. Some build configurations we aren't even able to test at all. To facilitate this, I would like to introduce a

Re: RFR: JDK-8151653: Hotspot build does not respect --enable-openjdk-only

Hi Erik, On 12/03/2016 2:31 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, When building hotspot with closed sources present and configuring with --enable-openjdk-only, various closed parts are included in the build anyway, at least on Windows. This needs to be fixed in preparation for the new hotspot build

Re: RFR: 8151351: HotSpot build process should regard --with-native-debug-symbols.

Hi Yasumasa, On 7/03/2016 1:38 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > Hi all, > > When I build fastdebug JDK (--enable-debug) with > --with-native-debug-symbols=internal, > build process generated *.debuginfo for libjsig and libjvm. > I think that build process should regard --with-native-debug-symbols.

Re: problems with freetype.dll, jdk 8 and windows

On 7/03/2016 6:59 AM, Hendrik Schreiber wrote: Hey there, I’m trying to build a 32 bit JDK8u with Windows. And hoorray! it’s building just fine. But when running some software I run into: java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: C:\…\jre\bin\freetype.dll: %1 is not a valid Win32 application

Re: solaris jdk build configure problem

On 2/03/2016 4:41 PM, prasanta sadhukhan wrote: Hi All, I got a fresh clone of jdk9 workspace today and trying to configure for build in my solaris 11.2 system. But it fails citing /*"configure: error: Unable to find objcopy, cannot enable native debug symbols" */I had used the same system in

Re: RFR: JDK-8150822: Fix typo in JDK-8150201

Looks good. Thanks, David - On 29/02/2016 8:19 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: In JDK-8150201, some debug flags were corrected. In one of the overrides, the file name was misspelled so the debug flag correction is not in effect. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150822 Patch: diff

Re: RFR: JDK-8150497: 32 jshell tests failed on Windows 32 bit

Hi Erik, On 26/02/2016 12:42 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: Here is some more fallout from [1]. The same kind of issue as in [2], Is there anything in place to ensure that [1] does not push up to jdk9/jdk9 without these follow up fixes in tow? We are already unfortunately hitting the problem in

<    5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   >