On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 17:00:13 GMT, Andrew Haley <a...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > > I can't tell what problem we're trying to solve by not simply checking in > > > the source code, in its preferred form, to the OpenJDK tree. Thhis has > > > practical advantages to do with traceability and security, and > > > in-principle reasons to do with basic Open Source practice too. On the > > > other side, there are no disadvantages. > > > > > > Do you suggest to copy the whole sleef source repo into jdk? > > I think so, along with scripting that generates the preprocessed file we use. > It might be the case that there are some sleef files not used at all they > could be omitted, but I'm not sure it would be useful, and from a > traceability point of view it's probably best to grab it all, unless it's > really huge Given the Sleef build system currently uses cmake, we would have two choices to build the header files as part of the OpenJDK build system: 1. take a dependency on cmake in order to build the Sleef headers 2. write a custom build system for Sleef to integrate into OpenJDK Neither approach sound good to me as a mandatory option. However, if we are to allow the person building OpenJDK to _optionally_ generate the headers from a Sleef source checkout (provided by the user with a `--with-sleef-src=/path/to/sleef`), we can then more easily take the assumption that the user has installed the necessary dependencies. That would also be in line with how binutils is being built and integrated. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18605#issuecomment-2229040615
