Sure, I can do it.
/Erik
On 2015-03-02 17:56, Seán Coffey wrote:
Hi Severin,
I'd missed your previous request. It was marked as a review request!
Consider this approved for jdk8u-dev. Can you add a 'noreg-build'
label to the bug report ?
Erik, would you be willing to push this changeset to
Still looks good.
(We usually skip the generated-configure in the review since it's
generated and quite large, at least if we remember to)
/Erik
On 2015-03-02 18:12, Steven Loomis wrote:
updated webrev (on cr)
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074048
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.j
Hello,
Here is my suggestion for makefile changes to go with the sjavac
changes. Adding build-dev to get review for my part.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8054717/webrev.root.01/
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054717
/Erik
On 2015-03-02 13:31, Andreas Lundblad wro
That combination didn't actually build for me. When compiling
jdk.jconsole, the following happened:
java.lang.RuntimeException:
com.sun.tools.javac.code.Symbol$CompletionFailure: class file for
java.awt.datatransfer.UnsupportedFlavorException not found
at
com.sun.tools.javac.api.JavacTask
In configure, we use the "magic" AC_PROG_OBJC function to locate the
compiler for Objective-C files. On the systems I tested, this returns
gcc, even if we want to use clang (by setting --with-toolchain-type=clang).
The following patch just sets OBJC to CC (that is, clang), if clang is
selected
Hello,
I installed Windows 8.1 and built JDK 9.
When I call
> make demos
the whole JDK is rebuilt and demos are not created.
The same is for
> make java.desktop
I do not see this problem on my Windows 7.
Should I send any additional info or log files? I do not have idea
what can
On 2015-03-03 13:04, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Hello,
I installed Windows 8.1 and built JDK 9.
When I call
> make demos
the whole JDK is rebuilt and demos are not created.
The same is for
> make java.desktop
I do not see this problem on my Windows 7.
Should I send any addition
On 2015-03-03 12:53, Erik Joelsson wrote:
That combination didn't actually build for me. When compiling
jdk.jconsole, the following happened:
java.lang.RuntimeException:
com.sun.tools.javac.code.Symbol$CompletionFailure: class file for
java.awt.datatransfer.UnsupportedFlavorException not foun
On 3/3/2015 3:46 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-03-03 13:04, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Hello,
I installed Windows 8.1 and built JDK 9.
When I call
> make demos
the whole JDK is rebuilt and demos are not created.
The same is for
> make java.desktop
I do not see this probl
On 2015-03-03 13:01, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
Open question: Should we do the same for toolchain-type=gcc? I'm not
quite sure what we're getting from calling the AC_PROG_OBJC macro,
except perhaps a loss of transparency on how our tools are picked up.
:-/ In fact, maybe we should just skip the
On 2015-03-03 14:35, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
On 3/3/2015 3:46 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-03-03 13:04, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Hello,
I installed Windows 8.1 and built JDK 9.
When I call
> make demos
the whole JDK is rebuilt and demos are not created.
The same is fo
On 2015-03-03 14:35, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
On 3/3/2015 3:46 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-03-03 13:04, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
Hello,
I installed Windows 8.1 and built JDK 9.
When I call
> make demos
the whole JDK is rebuilt and demos are not created.
The same is f
On 2015-03-03 13:53, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-03-03 12:53, Erik Joelsson wrote:
That combination didn't actually build for me. When compiling
jdk.jconsole, the following happened:
java.lang.RuntimeException:
com.sun.tools.javac.code.Symbol$CompletionFailure: class file for
java.awt
On 2015-03-03 15:03, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2015-03-03 13:53, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2015-03-03 12:53, Erik Joelsson wrote:
That combination didn't actually build for me. When compiling
jdk.jconsole, the following happened:
java.lang.RuntimeException:
com.sun.tools.javac.code.Symbol$
>> Open question: Should we do the same for toolchain-type=gcc? I'm not quite
>> sure what we're getting from calling the AC_PROG_OBJC macro, except perhaps
>> a loss of transparency on how our tools are picked up. :-/ In fact, maybe we
>> should just skip the OBJC variable completely. In fact,
OK, thanks.
Do I need a second or ready to commit?
On 3/3/2015 1:14 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Still looks good.
(We usually skip the generated-configure in the review since it's
generated and quite large, at least if we remember to)
/Erik
On 2015-03-02 18:12, Steven Loomis wrote:
updated w
toolchain.m4 prepends /usr/ccs/bin to the PATH on Solaris, which is a
bad thing if you already have your path set up to the correct toolchain!
I expect there is some history here, but it seems wrong to me.
Thanks,
David
17 matches
Mail list logo
