Hi Adrian,
The original thread has been hijacked by this discussion.
On 31/05/2017 10:26 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:12:16PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
I can't check the patches in detail now, but I see that the discussion
on those threads doesn't go much on
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:26 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <
glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:12:16PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
> > I can't check the patches in detail now, but I see that the discussion
> > on those threads doesn't go much on the technical side but
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:12:16PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
> I can't check the patches in detail now, but I see that the discussion
> on those threads doesn't go much on the technical side but rather
> focus on whether Oracle should support or not their own products :)
Well, I wish we could focu
2017-05-31 13:50 GMT+02:00 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:33:13PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
>> > Ok, so I signed the OCA and sent in three patches to address build
>> > issues on Linux/sparcv9. Those patches were rejected with the argument
>> > that no one can test the cod
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:33:13PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
> > Ok, so I signed the OCA and sent in three patches to address build
> > issues on Linux/sparcv9. Those patches were rejected with the argument
> > that no one can test the code, even though Oracle themselves
> > officially support Orac
2017-05-31 12:44 GMT+02:00 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 12:00:59PM +0200, dalibor topic wrote:
>> It's not very complicated. Please see http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/
>> for general details.
>>
>> When it comes to ports to new platforms, the necessary changes may be (a
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 12:00:59PM +0200, dalibor topic wrote:
> It's not very complicated. Please see http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/
> for general details.
>
> When it comes to ports to new platforms, the necessary changes may be (a
> lot) more invasive than a simple bugfix or two, though, s
On 31.05.2017 11:52, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:46:45AM +0200, dalibor topic wrote:
If you are running your own OpenJDK builds on a platform not listed on
https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/Build/Supported+Build+Platforms such
as SmartOS you may need to appl
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 11:46:45AM +0200, dalibor topic wrote:
> If you are running your own OpenJDK builds on a platform not listed on
> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/Build/Supported+Build+Platforms such
> as SmartOS you may need to apply additional patches outside of OpenJDK to
> fix what
On 29.05.2017 01:15, Mani Sarkar wrote:
* OpenJDK target: OS: solaris, CPU architecture: x86, address length: 64
Subject says sparc, though. Are you cross-compiling in some way?
Any ideas or thoughts about the above?
If you are running your own OpenJDK builds on a platform not listed on
Hi Mani,
I've dropped build-infra-dev as it is no longer actively used (it was
for the new build system a couple of years ago).
Not sure about relevance to adoption-discuss ??
On 29/05/2017 9:15 AM, Mani Sarkar wrote:
Hi,
While building OpenJDK8 on SmartOS (a fork of Sun Solaris), we came a
Hi,
While building OpenJDK8 on SmartOS (a fork of Sun Solaris), we came across
a number of anomalies and would like your help and support.
Here is the info from configure so you know a little bit more about the
platform we are talking about:
Running ./configure with --with-boot-jdk=/opt/local/j
12 matches
Mail list logo
