On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 02:23:20 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix 32/64-bit confusion in comment in VirtualMachineImpl.c
>
> src/hotspot/os_cpu/windows_x86/os_windows_x86.cpp
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 02:18:00 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Yes. As Julian says, it's something we set up in our builds:
>>
>> if test "x$FLAGS_CPU_BITS" = x64; then
>> $1_DEFINES_CPU_JDK="${$1_DEFINES_CPU_JDK} -D_LP64=1"
>> $1_DEFINES_CPU_JVM="${$1_DEFINES_CPU_JVM} -D_LP64=1"
>> fi
>
>
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 09:21:39 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> On SUSE with precompiled binutils this error occurs :
>
> configure: error: "/mydir/binutils-2.39-s15/lib64 must contain libbfd.a,
> libopcodes.a and libiberty.a"
>
> But the libs are present; the error message and detection is wrong.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 08:25:21 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> This is the implementation task for `JEP 490: ZGC: Remove the
>> Non-Generational Mode`. See the JEP for details.
>> [JDK-8335850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335850)
>
> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 23:48:22 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix 32/64-bit confusion in comment in VirtualMachineImpl.c
>
> make/scripts/compare.sh line 79:
>
>> 77:
>> 78:
On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 07:20:49 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
> This is the implementation task for `JEP 490: ZGC: Remove the
> Non-Generational Mode`. See the JEP for details.
> [JDK-8335850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335850)
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 8
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 08:25:21 GMT, Axel Boldt-Christmas
wrote:
>> This is the implementation task for `JEP 490: ZGC: Remove the
>> Non-Generational Mode`. See the JEP for details.
>> [JDK-8335850](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335850)
>
> Axel Boldt-Christmas has updated the pull request
> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>
> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>> This port was [deprecated for removal in JDK
>> 21](https://openjd
> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>
> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>> This port was [deprecated for removal in JDK
>> 21](https://openjd
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 03:13:02 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> It's something we do in our build. For us, _LP64 really means 64 bit
>
> It seems like the `_WIN64` check here was never useful. It's also been there
> since before the
> mercurial age.
The "mercurial age". Sounds like something in-betwee
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 03:05:32 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Error in os_windows.cpp for unknown cpu
>
> src/hotspot/share/adlc/main.cpp line 494:
>
>> 492: }
>> 493:
>> 494
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 03:24:48 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Error in os_windows.cpp for unknown cpu
>
> src/java.base/windows/native/libjava/gdefs_md.h line 31:
>
>> 29:
>>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 12:30:25 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> I'm glad you're giving some TLC to adlc. It is in desperate need of it.
>
> TLC?
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/TLC
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21744#discussion_r1822628499
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 20:44:25 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Sean Mullan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 150 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk-sandbox/jep486' into JDK-8338411
>> - Merge
>> - Update
On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 20:12:27 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Reviewed all tests under test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp. A few imports moved around
> unnecessarily but otherwise looks fine.
JAXP test comments fixed in
https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/21498/commits/5577e4884710eba498ee5f40fa85d47eaa07364d
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 21:18:41 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Comments on `java.security` classes.
>
> Also, I'd like to see some clarifications on what "the installed policy" or
> "the current policy" is. The `ProtectionDomain` mentions this when talking
> about dynamic permissions. On the other han
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 14:19:05 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> test/jdk/javax/xml/crypto/dsig/ErrorHandlerPermissions.java line 1:
>>
>>> 1: /*
>>
>> @wangweij It looks like this test can be deleted as it was specifically
>> trying to check that a `SecurityException` wasn't thrown, or did you think
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 18:35:05 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
>> Sean Mullan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 186 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk-sandbox/jep486' into JDK-8338411
>> - Update copyrigh
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:18:27 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:28:32 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:18:27 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:07:56 GMT, Harshitha Onkar wrote:
>> src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Font.java line 1613:
>>
>>> 1611: * interpreted as a {@code Font} object according to the
>>> 1612: * specification of {@code Font.decode(String)}
>>> 1613: * If the specified prope
> Prepare for JDK 25.
Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Update --release 24 symbol information for JDK 24 build 21
The macOS/AArch64 build 21 was taken from https://jdk.java.net/24/
-
Changes:
- all:
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 12:11:26 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Fix 32/64-bit confusion in comment in VirtualMachineImpl.c
>
> make/hotspot/gensrc/GensrcAdlc.gmk line 50:
>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:18:27 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:18:27 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:18:27 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
> main changes in the JEP and also includes an apidiff of the specif
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:11:54 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Prepare for JDK 25.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Update --release 24 symbol information for JDK 24 build 21
>
> The macOS/AArch64 build 21 was t
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:11:54 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Prepare for JDK 25.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Update --release 24 symbol information for JDK 24 build 21
>
> The macOS/AArch64 build 21 was t
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:22:03 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:05:17 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> make/scripts/compare.sh line 1457:
>>
>>> 1455: THIS_SEC_BIN="$THIS_SEC_DIR/sec-bin.zip"
>>> 1456: if [ "$OPENJDK_TARGET_OS" = "windows" ]; then
>>> 1457: JGSS_WINDOWS_BIN="jgss-windows-x64-bin.zip"
>>
>>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:19:03 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/adlc/main.cpp line 494:
>>
>>> 492: }
>>> 493:
>>> 494: #if !defined(_WIN32) || defined(_WIN64)
>>
>> Removing the conditionalization is fine for this change. But see also
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
On Wed, 30 Oct 2024 00:07:33 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> adlc need _CRT_NONSTDC_NO_WARNINGS as well... *sigh*
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/sharedRuntime_x86_32.cpp line 1433:
>
On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 14:17:37 GMT, Mark Reinhold wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/resources/jlink.properties line
>> 119:
>>
>>> 117: warn.prefix=Warning:
>>> 118:
>>> 119: err.runtime.link.not.linkable.runtime=The current run-time image does
>>> not support run-time linki
> Please review this patch which adds a jlink mode to the JDK which doesn't
> need the packaged modules being present. A.k.a run-time image based jlink.
> Fundamentally this patch adds an option to use `jlink` even though your JDK
> install might not come with the packaged modules (directory `jm
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 23:36:19 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Don't hardcode server variant
>
>> > > When trying to sort out the LDFLAGS issues, it turned out that I could
>>
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 19:59:47 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> I see you add the last line in the help message.
>
> ```
> Capabilities: +run-time-image
> ```
>
> This needs some discussion/consideration how that information be conveyed.
OK. It's currently part of the JEP, though which should explain w
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 17:13:54 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with five
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Better handle patched modules
>>
>>Also add a test which ensures that module patching (if present), will
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 19:12:55 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with five
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Better handle patched modules
>>
>>Also add a test which ensures that module patching (if present), will
>
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 13:15:32 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> On SUSE with precompiled binutils this error occurs :
>>
>> configure: error: "/mydir/binutils-2.39-s15/lib64 must contain libbfd.a,
>> libopcodes.a and libiberty.a"
>>
>> But the libs are present; the error message and detection is
On Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:40:59 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
42 matches
Mail list logo
