On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:23:03 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> I could also create a separate file for each launcher with a name pattern
>> and gather up all these files in StaticLibs.gmk, but then I will get
>> problems with left-over such files, for e.g. if incrementally building after
>> re
On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:18:41 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Hm. I put it there since it was the only place where we could be sure we
>> know *all* launchers for a module. I could have each launcher add itself to
>> the list, but then I either need to check if it is already there, or we will
On Fri, 1 Aug 2025 14:33:43 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove problemlisting
>
> make/ModuleWrapper.gmk line 82:
>
>> 80: TARGETS += $(LAUNCHERS_LIST)
>> 81: end
On Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:17:26 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> make/ModuleWrapper.gmk line 82:
>>
>>> 80: TARGETS += $(LAUNCHERS_LIST)
>>> 81: endif
>>> 82: endif
>>
>> I think it would be cleaner if this could be kept in LauncherCommon.gmk and
>> avoid having ModuleWrapper.gmk involved
> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated, and
> no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our jtreg
> tests, which assume these are present.
>
> The solution is fortunately simply: we just need to add a bunch of trivial
> launchers, whic
On Fri, 1 Aug 2025 17:12:55 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove problemlisting
>
> make/StaticLibs.gmk line 163:
>
>> 161: # $2: The launcher name
>> 162: define SetupRe
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:15:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated,
>> and no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our
>> jtreg tests, which assume these are present.
>>
>> The solution is fortunatel
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:15:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated,
>> and no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our
>> jtreg tests, which assume these are present.
>>
>> The solution is fortunatel
On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:15:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated,
>> and no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our
>> jtreg tests, which assume these are present.
>>
>> The solution is fortunatel
> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated, and
> no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our jtreg
> tests, which assume these are present.
>
> The solution is fortunately simply: we just need to add a bunch of trivial
> launchers, whic
On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 14:54:35 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated, and
> no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our jtreg
> tests, which assume these are present.
>
> The solution is fortunately simp
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:09:58 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> As regards the shim when I wonder if it should use CreateProcessW but maybe
> it doesn't matter for the test environments where they will run.
I must admit that I am not very well versed in Windows programming. What is the
difference? I th
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:24:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> So while we continue to hammer out how to improve this, I think it is
> important to be able to test static builds in mainline, or they will break.
Agree with @magicus on the importance of being able to test static builds in
mainlin
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:09:58 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Right now, the static-jdk image is a bit strange in that it's a modular
> run-time image but with all native code compiled into bin/java. In time we
> hope that jlink will be able to create a static image where everything is in
> the singl
On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 14:54:35 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated, and
> no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our jtreg
> tests, which assume these are present.
>
> The solution is fortunately simp
> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated, and
> no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our jtreg
> tests, which assume these are present.
>
> The solution is fortunately simply: we just need to add a bunch of trivial
> launchers, whic
On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 14:54:35 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated, and
> no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our jtreg
> tests, which assume these are present.
>
> The solution is fortunately simp
17 matches
Mail list logo
