On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:58:00 GMT, Chris Plummer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Both the SA and hotspot os/bsd directories. >>> >>> So what are your plans with the os/bsd directory? Rename it to something >>> like os/darwin or os/macos, strip it of support that doesn't apply to >>> macos, and then create a new os/bsd directory in your bsd project repo that >>> only applies to a true bsd port. >> >> If that's acceptable to the project, I think that it would be a good idea >> long term. In the short term, we're just trying to get the port working with >> as little disruption to upstream as possible. > >> If that's acceptable to the project, I think that it would be a good idea >> long term. In > If those are your plans with os/bsd, I think before doing these changes to SA > you should also hash out and get buy-in for the proposed changes to os/bsd. > The SA changes are somewhat disruptive and need to be well thought out before > we proceed. > >> In the short term, we're just trying to get the port working with as little >> disruption to upstream as possible. > What would be the least disruptive would be to directly fix the existing BSD > port without the proposed restructuring. Any idea why the recent changes > broke the BSD port and how hard (and possibly disruptive) it would be to fix. @plummercj Ok, will do that. Thanks for the feedback! ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/29003#issuecomment-3725724121
