On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 17:57:29 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request with a new target base due
>> to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated
>> changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven
>> addit
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:15:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will pave
> the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes here
> will:
>
> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the static libraries.
> This means that the risk of symbol conflict is th
> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will pave
> the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes here
> will:
>
> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the static libraries.
> This means that the risk of symbol conflict is th
On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 16:19:39 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will
>> pave the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes
>> here will:
>>
>> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the sta
On Thu, 30 May 2024 19:35:44 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Do os::lookup_function need to be implemented on Windows too, for symmetry,
> even if it is only used on Unix platforms?
@AlanBateman suggested to add `lookup_function` to os_windows.cpp as well, but
just let it contain ShouldNotRea
> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will pave
> the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes here
> will:
>
> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the static libraries.
> This means that the risk of symbol conflict is th
On Thu, 30 May 2024 13:00:21 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will pave
> the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes here
> will:
>
> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the static l
On Thu, 30 May 2024 13:00:21 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will pave
> the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes here
> will:
>
> 1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the static l
This patch contains a set of changes to improve static builds. They will pave
the way for implementing a full static-only java launcher. The changes here
will:
1) Make sure non-exported symbols are made local in the static libraries. This
means that the risk of symbol conflict is the same for s
21 matches
Mail list logo
