RFR: JDK-8201263: Traling backslash in VS120COMNTOOLS leads to ugly error message when running tests

Please review this change which addresses a minor issue when running tests on some Windows machines. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201263 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8201263/webrev.00/open/

Re: RFR: JDK-8201263: Traling backslash in VS120COMNTOOLS leads to ugly error message when running tests

Looks good. /Erik On 2018-04-06 15:04, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: Please review this change which addresses a minor issue when running tests on some Windows machines. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201263 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8201263/webrev.00/open/

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi Magnus, Matthias, I tried to build 32 bit Windows but it fails to run for me with Corrupted ZIP library: c:\work\jdk-dev\build\windows-x86-normal-server-release\jdk\bin\zip.dll The problem is that zip.dll exports all symbols as C++ rather than C. For example, ZIP_CRC32 is exported as

RFR: JDK-8201267: Disable warnings for VS2017 to enable building

We are rather close to being able to build the JDK using VS2017. There are still some warnings that need to be disabled (separate issues filed to fix them) and some other minor build tweaks that has surfaced now that Hotspot builds successfully. With this patch, it should be possible to build

Re: RFR: JDK-8201263: Traling backslash in VS120COMNTOOLS leads to ugly error message when running tests

Testing revealed that the fix solved the immediate problem of removing the error message, but a similar problem occurred when the resulting JTREG_BASIC_OPTIONS variable is then used. Specifically the problem is that the path returned from the shell execution (still) contains spaces, so the

RE: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hello, I just noticed 2 additonal issues regarding mapfile-removal : 1. The follow up change that removed mapfiles for exes as well leads on Win32 bit to this link error : Creating library C:/JVM/jdk_jdk_ntintel/support/native/java.base/java/java.lib and object

RFR: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hello, please review : Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201226 change : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8201226/ mostly I added JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places where the win32bit build missed it . A difference is

RFR: JDK-8201229 Disable warnings as errors in aarch64 jib profile

The aarch64 profile does not always build without warnings; use --disable-as-warnings for the profile to be usable in jib. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201229 Patch inline: diff --git a/make/conf/jib-profiles.js b/make/conf/jib-profiles.js --- a/make/conf/jib-profiles.js +++

Re: RFR: JDK-8200083: Bump bootjdk used for JDK 11 at Oracle to JDK 10

Hi Erik, On 05/04/18 18:57, Erik Joelsson wrote: > The intention of my second suggested patch was basically to keep > allowing JDK 9 in configure for a while but being pretty sure it would > stop working eventually. I don't like doing it that way. It's much > better with a clear fail early error

RFR: JDK-8201236 Straighten out dtrace build logic

The dtrace build logic was copied straight out of the old Hotspot build system, and is quite convoluted. It should be split into the separate parts it actually contains of: 1) A gensrc step which runs with other gensrc ahead of compilation 2) Two independent libraries that can be build at any

Re: RFR: JDK-8200083: Bump bootjdk used for JDK 11 at Oracle to JDK 10

On 05.04.2018 20:11, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2018-04-04 18:56, Martin Buchholz wrote: On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 5:03 PM, David Holmes > wrote:     On 5/04/2018 7:00 AM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:     I have to agree. There can't be two

Re: (urgent) RFR: JDK-8201221: JDK-8199608 introduced a build race on macosx

On 2018-04-06 01:42, Erik Joelsson wrote: JDK-8199608 introduced a build race on macosx and is failing all our macosx builds. The declaration: $(BUILD_LIBFONTMANAGER): $(BUILD_LIBAWT_LWAWT) does not work because the SetupNativeCompilation call for BUILD_LIBAWT_LWAWT is positioned further

Re: RFR: JDK-8201229 Disable warnings as errors in aarch64 jib profile

Looks good. /Erik On 2018-04-06 02:03, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: The aarch64 profile does not always build without warnings; use --disable-as-warnings for the profile to be usable in jib. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201229 Patch inline: diff --git

Re: RFR: JDK-8201236 Straighten out dtrace build logic

Looks good in general. In JvmDtraceObjects.gmk, comment on line 38 needs to be updated. /Erik On 2018-04-06 03:57, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: The dtrace build logic was copied straight out of the old Hotspot build system, and is quite convoluted. It should be split into the separate parts

Re: RFR: JDK-8200083: Bump bootjdk used for JDK 11 at Oracle to JDK 10

On 4/6/18 2:16 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote: Hi Erik, On 05/04/18 18:57, Erik Joelsson wrote: The intention of my second suggested patch was basically to keep allowing JDK 9 in configure for a while but being pretty sure it would stop working eventually. I don't like doing it that way. It's much

Re: RFR: JDK-8200083: Bump bootjdk used for JDK 11 at Oracle to JDK 10

On 2018-04-06 09:51, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: I think the N-1 policy should be more clearly stated as "last GA". When we started work on JDK 11, JDK 10 had not yet shipped, and so it was appropriate for JDK 11 to use JDK 9 as the boot jdk.  Now that JDK 10 has shipped, it becomes a candidate to

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

I think it's reasonable to update the existing webrev. /Magnus > 6 apr. 2018 kl. 15:20 skrev Baesken, Matthias : > > Hello, I just noticed 2 additonal issues regarding mapfile-removal : > > The follow up change that removed mapfiles for exes as well

Re: RFR: JDK-8200083: Bump bootjdk used for JDK 11 at Oracle to JDK 10

On 04/06/2018 09:57 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: On 2018-04-06 09:51, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: I think the N-1 policy should be more clearly stated as "last GA". When we started work on JDK 11, JDK 10 had not yet shipped, and so it was appropriate for JDK 11 to use JDK 9 as the boot jdk. Now