Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 11, 2017, at 6:45 AM, Peter Levart wrote: > > Hi Mandy, > > On 04/03/2017 11:50 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: >>JDK 8 JDK 9 >>- - >> OS_NAMELinux linux >>SunOS

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

Hi Mandy, On 04/03/2017 11:50 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: JDK 8 JDK 9 - - OS_NAMELinux linux SunOS solaris Darwin macos Windows windows OS_ARCH

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 2017-04-11 09:40, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2017-04-07 22:04, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 6, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: Having though this over real hard, I'd realized I need to make a plea

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 2017-04-07 22:04, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 6, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: Having though this over real hard, I'd realized I need to make a plea for sanity and consistency. I thought I should lay

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 6, 2017, at 1:09 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > > Having though this over real hard, I'd realized I need to make a plea for > sanity and consistency. I thought I should lay low in this discussion, but I > can't. Choosing "amd64" as the name for

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

It is historical revisionism. AArch32 was introduced with ARMv8, before there was no need to distinguish between 32-bit and 64-bit execution states. If people are selecting, say, JNI libraries, based on os.arch, then there is every reason to be consistent. On 4 April 2017 at 17:39, Andrew Haley

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 2017-04-04 10:04, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:39 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, si...@cjnash.com: On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com:

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 12:42 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > On 03/04/2017 19:41, Mandy Chung wrote: > >> Webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ >> > I went through the updates to jlink, assuming test SystemModulesTest will be >

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 12:35 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > > 2017/4/4 8:22:50 -0700, a...@redhat.com: >> On 04/04/17 16:12, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >>> The trouble here is that "arm64" and "aarch64" are effectively synonyms >>> for the ISA, but in the JDK we've wound up using them

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 04/04/17 17:35, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > This does raise another question, though: Should we use "aarch32" > instead of "arm32" for the 32-bit ARM architecture? Probably not. I believe that "aarch32" is historical revisionism coming from ARM: it didn't exist as a name before AArch64

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

2017/4/4 8:22:50 -0700, a...@redhat.com: > On 04/04/17 16:12, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >> The trouble here is that "arm64" and "aarch64" are effectively synonyms >> for the ISA, but in the JDK we've wound up using them as the names of >> two different ports. >> >> A JMOD file built for the

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:12 AM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > > 2017/4/4 1:04:22 -0700, magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com: >> On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote: >>> ... >>> >>> JDK 8 JDK 9 >>> - - >>> OS_NAMELinux

Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 04/04/17 16:12, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > The trouble here is that "arm64" and "aarch64" are effectively synonyms > for the ISA, but in the JDK we've wound up using them as the names of > two different ports. > > A JMOD file built for the 64-bit ARM architecture will (one hopes) run >

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 04/04/2017 10:12 AM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2017/4/4 1:04:22 -0700, magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com: On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote: ... JDK 8 JDK 9 - - OS_NAMELinux linux SunOS

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

2017/4/4 1:04:22 -0700, magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com: > On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote: >> ... >> >>JDK 8 JDK 9 >>- - >> OS_NAMELinux linux >>SunOS solaris >>Darwin

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

Oh, I missed the further discussion before I posted this and the webrev was apparently updated in place to reflect that discussion. Please ignore my comment below. /Erik On 2017-04-04 11:57, Erik Joelsson wrote: Hello, I don't quite understand this. In the proposition below it says osx,

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

Hello, I don't quite understand this. In the proposition below it says osx, and x64, but in platform.m4 you generate macos and amd64. Does this then get translated again and why are we introducing yet another name for the operating system on Apple computers? /Erik On 2017-04-03 20:41,

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 03/04/17 19:41, Mandy Chung wrote: > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ > > This revisits the OS name and arch in packaging JDK modules > to extend the module descriptor with ModuleTarget class file > attribute. We considered matching with the

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:39 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, si...@cjnash.com: On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: Webrev:

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 03/04/2017 19:41, Mandy Chung wrote: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ I went through the updates to jlink, assuming test SystemModulesTest will be aligned to the recent mails. In DefaultImageBuilder.storeFiles then

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 03/04/2017 22:38, Simon Nash wrote: : My comment was regarding the change of value for OS_NAME. Given that there is no compatibility issue here, does it make sense for the new value to be something that is no longer current in Apple terminology? Just on compatibility then just to say

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 4:10 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > > 2017/4/3 14:50:52 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: >>> On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:39 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >>> 2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, si...@cjnash.com: ... I am not sure why we would change to osx for Mac

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

2017/4/3 14:50:52 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: >> On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:39 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >> 2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, si...@cjnash.com: >>> ... >>> >>> I am not sure why we would change to osx for Mac when the Mac developers >>> have recently dropped the Mac OS X terminology

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:39 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > > 2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, si...@cjnash.com: >> On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >>> 2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: Webrev:

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, si...@cjnash.com: > On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: >> 2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ >>> >>> ... >>> >>> This shows the old and new value of

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 03/04/2017 22:07, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 3, 2017, at 1:35 PM, Simon Nash wrote: On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: I am not sure why we would change to osx for Mac when the Mac developers have recently dropped the Mac OS X terminology and changed it

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

> On Apr 3, 2017, at 1:35 PM, Simon Nash wrote: > > On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: > > I am not sure why we would change to osx for Mac when the Mac developers > have recently dropped the Mac OS X terminology and changed it to macOS. Just to be clear,

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: 2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ ... This shows the old and new value of OS_NAME/OS_ARCH properties in the `release` file: JDK 8

Re: Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.ch...@oracle.com: > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ > > ... > > This shows the old and new value of OS_NAME/OS_ARCH properties > in the `release` file: > > JDK 8 JDK 9 > -

Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/ This revisits the OS name and arch in packaging JDK modules to extend the module descriptor with ModuleTarget class file attribute. We considered matching with the system properties. Linux x64 JDK can run on a system