Any more reviewers for this? Thanks, Severin On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 08:20 -0400, David Holmes wrote:
On 26/09/2018 7:52 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi David,
Thanks for the review!
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 07:39 -0400, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Severin,
Changes present seem okay, but I don't see the SA changes, and don't you want the JDK test change from this as well:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/2ff471390a03
??
Test changes are there: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8073139/jdk8/01/jdk/test/su... http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8073139/jdk8/01/jdk/test/to...
Oops I missed the split up. Thanks.
All seems fine,
The SA isn't built on ppc64/ppc64le (INCLUDE_SA=false). I can include SA changes in the backport, but they won't do anything.
Okay.
Thanks, David
Thanks, Severin
On 26/09/2018 7:26 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi,
Could I please get reviews for this JDK 8 backport which fixes some tooling issues on Linux ppc64le? Prior this patch, a ppc64le build would report as "ppc64" via os.arch system property which breaks tooling such as maven in as much as if some dependency needs native libraries it would download BE binaries where it actually should download LE binaries. Example for os.arch/java.library.path:
pre: $ ./jdk8-pre-ppc64le/bin/java TestProperty java.library.path = /usr/java/packages/lib/ppc64:/usr/lib64:/lib64:/lib:/usr/lib os.arch = ppc64
post: $ ./jdk8-post-ppc64le/bin/java TestProperty java.library.path = /usr/java/packages/lib/ppc64le:/usr/lib64:/lib64:/lib:/usr/lib os.arch = ppc64le
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073139 webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8073139/jdk8/01/
Including build-dev for build changes. hotspot-dev and ppc-aix-port-dev for JDK/hotspot changes.
This backport should only have minor differences to the changes in JDK 11. We have been using similar patches in Fedora for months. Thoughts?
Thanks, Severin