On 02/23/2012 05:50 AM, Michael McMahon wrote:
This is the webrev for the Mac OS changes for JDK8. It is pretty much
a straight merge of the current jdk7u-dev changes. It builds and passes
most
JCK and regression tests with only a small number of failures.
What kind of failures? I guess they a
Michael, there is also this change in the langtools repo:
changeset: 1137:d8e7e2ccbd41
user:jjh
date:Tue Jan 24 10:24:42 2012 -0800
summary: 7130704: Few of the jtreg tests need to be ported for mac builds
- jjh
On 2/22/2012 1:50 PM, Michael McMahon wrote:
This is the w
This is the webrev for the Mac OS changes for JDK8. It is pretty much
a straight merge of the current jdk7u-dev changes. It builds and passes most
JCK and regression tests with only a small number of failures.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/7113349/jdk8/webrev.1/
There are three separate w
hs23-b16 has been integrated into jdk8-b27.
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/rev/1533dfab9903
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/corba/rev/4fffe75e4edd
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/hotspot/rev/3b24e7e01d20
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/jaxp/rev/80c47eb83d24
http://hg.openjdk.j
Changeset: 094138495da4
Author:amurillo
Date: 2012-02-10 11:46 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/hotspot/rev/094138495da4
7144322: new hotspot build - hs23-b16
Reviewed-by: jcoomes
! make/hotspot_version
Changeset: 77a488cd4af2
Author:dlong
Date: 2012-02-15
On 2012-02-22 12:19, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 22/02/2012 10:43, Erik Joelsson wrote:
I assume your are comparing against the current faster MKS build
times, right? Rather than the slower cygwin build.
Yes, of course.
/Erik
On Feb 22, 2012, at 12:28 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 02/21/2012 10:10 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
>> Posted: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/138
>
> Nice. Does this project have a mailing list?
build-infra-dev
> Andrew.
>
On 02/21/2012 10:10 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
> Posted: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/138
Nice. Does this project have a mailing list?
Andrew.
On 22/02/2012 10:49, Erik Joelsson wrote:
When we state that supporting IDEs is a non goal, we mean that we will
not make an effort to improve the support over what is already there.
It's an important goal that we don't regress functionality or workflows.
If the langtools team is happy keeping
On 22/02/2012 10:43, Erik Joelsson wrote:
...
We are trying to move to a cygwin only environment, to standardize
around fewer environments for better supportability. We chose cygwin
because it's free. This is of course dependent on us getting the windows
build to be fast enough using cygwin. We
When we state that supporting IDEs is a non goal, we mean that we will
not make an effort to improve the support over what is already there.
It's an important goal that we don't regress functionality or workflows.
If the langtools team is happy keeping a separate IDE configuration
parallel to
On 2012-02-22 10:57, Volker Simonis wrote:
Has anybody thought about how these changes will affect the builds on Windows?
Yes, we in the build-infra team have given this a lot of thought. Since
the windows build is among the slowest, this is where we see most
potential for improvement.
I kn
Has anybody thought about how these changes will affect the builds on Windows?
I know that JEP 138 mentions a multi-core Linux machine as main
target, but I think we should not completely forget about the Windows
build because:
- as of today, the Windows build are already significantly slower tha
13 matches
Mail list logo
