On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 18:30:30 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this simple change to allow for extra `jlink` flags to be
>> passed to the JDK build by `configure`. The bug describes use-cases where
>> this would be needed.
>>
>> Testing:
>> - [x] GHA
>> - [x] Manual tests with a fix
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 18:30:30 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this simple change to allow for extra `jlink` flags to be
>> passed to the JDK build by `configure`. The bug describes use-cases where
>> this would be needed.
>>
>> Testing:
>> - [x] GHA
>> - [x] Manual tests with a fix
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 10:37:10 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this simple change to allow for extra `jlink` flags to be
> passed to the JDK build by `configure`. The bug describes use-cases where
> this would be needed.
>
> Testing:
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] Manual tests with a fix for
>
On Sun, 23 Mar 2025 21:14:47 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> This PR adds `bin/sort_includes.py`, a python3 script to check that blocks of
> include statements in C++ files are sorted alphabetically and that there's at
> least one blank line between user and sys includes (as per the [style
> guide](h
On Sun, 23 Mar 2025 21:14:47 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> This PR adds `bin/sort_includes.py`, a python3 script to check that blocks of
> include statements in C++ files are sorted alphabetically and that there's at
> least one blank line between user and sys includes (as per the [style
> guide](h
The target selection configuration flag for Windows AArch64 should be added to
the build documentation for improved discoverability and completeness.
-
Commit messages:
- Document how to build for Windows AArch64
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24267/files
Webrev: https
On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 10:42:50 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>> Hi, the workaround 'disable lto in g1ParScanThreadState because of special
>>> inlining/flattening used there' is removed , why this works now ?
>>
>> The issue there was the `-Wattribute-warning` warnings that were being
>> generated.
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 09:28:49 GMT, Frederic Thevenet
wrote:
>> OpenJDK vendors who provide binary distributions for the Windows and macOS
>> platforms generally need to ensure that every native executable file and
>> dynamic library that are part of the binary builds are digitally signed
>> us
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 12:40:42 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> There is an extra a.out file generated located in repository root directory
>> after execute the configure command with llvm/clang compiler sometimes, not
>> always. The a.out was generate by `$LINKER -Wl,-v 2>&1 | $HEAD -n 1`
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 08:55:09 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Can you coordinate with Naoto on this? There is a CSR in progress to switch
> Console back to using the java.base implementation by default.
Right - but that still keeps the existing JLine-based provider, and so the
problems it has still
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 09:28:49 GMT, Frederic Thevenet
wrote:
>> OpenJDK vendors who provide binary distributions for the Windows and macOS
>> platforms generally need to ensure that every native executable file and
>> dynamic library that are part of the binary builds are digitally signed
>> us
The `java.io.Console` has several backends: a simple on in `java.base`, a more
convenient one in `jdk.internal.le` (with line-reading based on JLine) and one
for JShell.
The backend based on JLine is proving to be a somewhat problematic - JLine is
very powerful, possibly too powerful and comple
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 07:54:48 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
> The `java.io.Console` has several backends: a simple on in `java.base`, a
> more convenient one in `jdk.internal.le` (with line-reading based on JLine)
> and one for JShell.
>
> The backend based on JLine is proving to be a somewhat problem
Hello, you can unsub by entering your email here:
https://mail.openjdk.org/mailman/listinfo/build-dev
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025, 11:59 PM Julio Cesar Sanchez Diaz <
juliosand...@yandex.com> wrote:
> unsubscript
>
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 10:43:32 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> This PR implements JEP 503: Remove the 32-bit x86 Port.
>>
>> The JEP is proposed to target 25, we would not integrate until JEP is ready.
>> Reviews are appreciated meanwhile.
>>
>> This is only the removal of obvious 32-bit x86 par
On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 16:52:16 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> This PR implements JEP 503: Remove the 32-bit x86 Port.
>
> The JEP is proposed to target 25, we would not integrate until JEP is ready.
> Reviews are appreciated meanwhile.
>
> This is only the removal of obvious 32-bit x86 parts, mos
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 21:06:41 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>> Using the log file from ExecuteWithLog as the recipe target to work around
>>> changing/signing the actual target file in place is an interesting choice,
>>> but I think it will work. Have you tried incremental builds thoroughly?
>>
>>
> OpenJDK vendors who provide binary distributions for the Windows and macOS
> platforms generally need to ensure that every native executable file and
> dynamic library that are part of the binary builds are digitally signed using
> a set of OS specific APIs.
>
> The JDK build systems already
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 08:59:39 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> The `java.io.Console` has several backends: a simple on in `java.base`, a
>> more convenient one in `jdk.internal.le` (with line-reading based on JLine)
>> and one for JShell.
>>
>> The backend based on JLine is proving to be a somewhat
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 22:19:39 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/opto/output.cpp line 39:
>>
>>> 37: #include "opto/block.hpp"
>>> 38: #include "opto/c2_MacroAssembler.hpp"
>>> 39: #include "opto/c2compiler.hpp"
>>
>> Hmm.
>>
>> #include "opto/c2_MacroAssembler.hpp"
>> #include "opto/c
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 21:19:03 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> Thanks for all the comments so far.
>
> First thing is that my tool does nothing about re-ordering block of
> conditional includes vs unconditional includes. I briefly looked into that
> but it gets very complicated, very quickly. That kind
21 matches
Mail list logo
