On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 14:08:34 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
This pull request has now been int
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 13:07:11 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> To allow for more flexibility when using the SetupTarget macro in a custom
> extension of Main.gmk, I would like to add a DIR parameter, which is the
> directory the sub make command CDs into before calling make. It defaults to
> $(TOPDI
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 13:10:16 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> I've recently tried to use UTIL_ARG_WITH for new configure arguments in a
>> project repository and discovered some issues. The project in question may
>> or may not end up in mainline at some point in the future, but I think
>> fixing
On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 01:03:28 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Initial implementation for supporting building a fully statically linked
> (with a desired set of JDK native libraries and libjvm) Java launcher
> executable, which is named as 'javastatic'.
>
> In this PR, the support is only added for t
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 10:55:12 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> I think we've converged on the right motivation. If would be good to check if
> there are TLS tests that could run with --limit-modules java.base, that would
> give confidence that the API/implementation will work when the run-time image
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 17:25:16 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> The changes look ok.
Thanks. I'll wait for approval on https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8307858
as well.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21/pull/26#issuecomment-1599256118
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 17:24:03 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> > @erikj - You did a round of Mach5 testing on the JDK22 version of this fix.
> > Do you have plans to redo that testing for the JDK21 backport?
>
> I have done testing of the JDK 21 version of the patch and it's running
> cleanly.
Than
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 20:36:07 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> 8307858: [REDO] JDK-8307194 Add make target for optionally building a
> complete set of all JDK and hotspot libjvm static libraries
The changes look ok.
-
Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjd
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 22:10:08 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty
wrote:
> @erikj - You did a round of Mach5 testing on the JDK22 version of this fix.
> Do you have plans to redo that testing for the JDK21 backport?
I have done testing of the JDK 21 version of the patch and it's running cleanly.
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 13:34:24 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> We have a need for creating custom variants of the JDK image and would like
> to be able to reuse the existing Images.gmk for doing so. To be able to do
> that, we need to define some variables that are suitable for overrides.
> Specific
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 13:51:59 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
>> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
>> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 13:51:59 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
>> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
>> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated
> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 14:08:34 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
Hi Erik, I agree that logging thi
We have a need for creating custom variants of the JDK image and would like to
be able to reuse the existing Images.gmk for doing so. To be able to do that,
we need to define some variables that are suitable for overrides. Specifically,
we need:
EXTRA_MODULES: a list of extra java module names
The top level target "java.base-jmod" currently has all other jmod targets on
the prerequisites list. This is because we store a checksum for every non
upgradeable module in java.base and most of the modules aren't upgradeable.
But, since we do have upgradeable modules, those shouldn't be on the
To allow for more flexibility when using the SetupTarget macro in a custom
extension of Main.gmk, I would like to add a DIR parameter, which is the
directory the sub make command CDs into before calling make. It defaults to
$(TOPDIR)/make. This parameter should be set when the target makefile of
> I've recently tried to use UTIL_ARG_WITH for new configure arguments in a
> project repository and discovered some issues. The project in question may or
> may not end up in mainline at some point in the future, but I think fixing
> these general issues in UTIL_ARG_WITH is worth it independent
I've recently tried to use UTIL_ARG_WITH for new configure arguments in a
project repository and discovered some issues. The project in question may or
may not end up in mainline at some point in the future, but I think fixing
these general issues in UTIL_ARG_WITH is worth it independent of my s
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 12:00:05 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> Hi Erik, the added codesign tool calls are already printed into the rather
> verbose config.log. In the main configure output we see only what we saw
> before
>
> checking for macosx code signing mode... auto, default checking for mac
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 14:08:34 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
Hi Erik, the added codesign tool
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 00:57:46 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> > Maybe you are thinking about the size of libsunec or non-technical issues
> > that meant it wasn't included by some distributions? There weren't an issue
> > with deciding which providers to include to java.base. I think the
> > motivati
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 20:36:28 GMT, Anthony Scarpino
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I need a code review for moving the contents of the jdk.crypto.ec module into
> java.base. This moves the SunEC JCE Provider (Elliptic Curve) into
> java.base. EC has always been separate from the base module/pkg because of
On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 14:08:34 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> We were running into some issues with the configure checks checking the
> codesign tool. Unfortunately the output is a bit limited and should be
> enhanced, especially printing what is really called.
I don't think we should print that
24 matches
Mail list logo
