On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 17:09:06 GMT, Severin Gehwolf <sgehw...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement which adds a hidden `jlink` option >> `--sha-overrides` that can be used to provide alternative hash sums for >> files in an image. Please see the bug for use-cases as to why this is >> needed. This patch allows for the `--sha-overrides` option to be either >> specified multiple times or separated by a comma to list multiple hash sum >> overrides. Alternatively when starting with the `@` character the override >> options come from a file. The format is the same: >> `<module>|<file-path>|<sha>` triplets, either on the command line or in a >> file (one per line). >> >> The added, linux only, test uses `objcopy` to fully strip `libjvm.so` of its >> symbols with the assumption that this would change the hash sum of the >> resulting file. Then, a link from the run-time image is being attempted with >> the added option >> `--sha-overrides=java.base|lib/server/libjvm.so|<new-sha-sum>` and verifies >> the link succeeds. >> >> Having something like that is useful when it gets combined with e.g. >> `--save-jlink-arg-files` to produce a `jlink` which works out of the box on >> say JDK builds that modify binaries due to some debug symbols handling >> outside the JDK builds' control. >> >> While using `--ignore-modified-runtime` is an option that is sub-optimal as >> that would spit out many warnings in the RPM build case, where the user >> wouldn't control that RPM build to begin with. >> >> Testing: >> - [x] GHA >> - [x] Some manual tests together with >> [JDK-8352692](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8352692) on some JEP 493 >> enabled builds. >> - [x] `jlink` jtreg tests. >> >> Thoughts? > > Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one > additional commit since the last revision: > > Remove @enablePreview from runtimeImage tests I've created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353185 for the upgradeable files issue (tzdata and cacerts). ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24190#issuecomment-2761511806
