[OpenJDK 2D-Dev] Remove including of link.h to improve portability

[Phil Race]

I'm (still) OK with this .. one other reviewer please somebody.

-phil.

On 3/20/2012 1:37 AM, Jonathan Lu wrote:
> Hello, could anyone please help to take a look at this splitted patch?
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Jonathan
>
> 2012/3/13 Jonathan Lu <luchsh at linux.vnet.ibm.com 
> <mailto:luchsh at linux.vnet.ibm.com>>
>
>     Hi Phil,
>
>     Thanks a lot for the review and testing, I've splited the patch
>     into two parts, one for 2D repository and another for TL. Here's
>     the patch for 2D repository:
>
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/7152519/
>     <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eluchsh/7152519/>
>
>     So could anybody please help to do another review?
>
>     Thanks a lot!
>
>     - Jonathan
>
>
>     On 03/13/2012 02:22 AM, Phil Race wrote:
>
>         I added two of those includes myself I believe and I doubt I
>         did it unless needed
>         and others apparently found it necessary too. So we need to be
>         sure this is OK.
>         However at least one of those I added dates back to Solaris 8
>         being the build platform
>         so maybe its no longer needed.
>
>         I ran the patch through our internal jprt build system on all
>         platforms which
>         for Solaris uses a recent Solaris 10 update and it built fine.
>         I didn't notice
>         any new warnings on the files I know anything about.
>
>         > 7152519
>         It was incorrectly submitted as awt, I moved it to 2D.
>
>         But I think you should split this into 2 patches.
>         The above bug can be used for all the 2D ones and push to 2d.
>
>         The other one for the nio and security patches can go to the
>         "tl" repo.
>
>         -phil.
>
>
>
>
>         On 3/11/2012 8:29 PM, Jonathan Lu wrote:
>
>             Bug 7152519 has been created for this patch.
>
>             - Jonathan
>
>             On 03/09/2012 07:49 PM, Jonathan Lu wrote:
>
>                 Hello 2d-dev,
>
>                 I find that link.h is included in several place of
>                 OpenJDK code, mostly together with dlfcn.h, but this
>                 caused portability problem in my testing on some Unix
>                 platforms, such as AIX.
>                 So far as I see OpenJDK only makes use of basic
>                 POSIX.1-2001 compatible dynamic library manipulation
>                 functions, such as dlopen, dlclose, dlsym, dlerr
>                 functions, no other extensions found, so is link.h
>                 still neccessary for current implementation? because
>                 link.h is not found in the c-POSIX standard headers
>                 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_POSIX_library) and I
>                 think this removal will be an enhancement for
>                 portability, does that make sense?
>
>                 Here's the proposed patch, since most parts of it are
>                 from Java2d so I post it here for discussion.
>                 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/remove_link_h/
>                 <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eluchsh/remove_link_h/>
>                 <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eluchsh/remove_link_h/>
>
>                 And one more question, in
>                 src/solaris/native/sun/java2d/x11/XRBackendNative.c I
>                 found following comments
>                  #ifdef __solaris__
>                  /* Solaris 10 will not have these symbols at runtime */
>                  #include <link.h>
>
>                 And in src/solaris/native/sun/awt/fontpath.c,
>                  #include <dlfcn.h>
>                  #ifndef __linux__ /* i.e. is solaris */
>                  #include <link.h>
>                  #endif
>
>                 I've built successfully on Ubuntu 11.10 32bit and
>                 OpenSolaris Express 2010.11 x86, the patch seems to be
>                 OK, but does anybody know the situation on Solaris
>                 (e.g. Solaris 10) of this problem?
>                 I assume it will also comply with POSIX.1-2001
>                 standard, and provide all the required functions in
>                 dlfcn.h, right?
>
>                 Cheers!
>                 - Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>