Build progress on Mac OS X PowerPC

[Eric Richardson]

Andrew,

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Andrew John Hughes <
gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org> wrote:

> 2009/11/15 Michael Franz <mvfranz at gmail.com>:
> > Eric,
> >
> > I have encountered this issue before.  I am not sure what I did to fix
> it.
> > I think I used ecj instead of the Apple javac.  Check the javac perl
> script
> > that IcedTea has.  The other option is to apply this patch in the
> required
> > build files.
> >
> >
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/ecj/01/webrev.01/make/build.xml.udiff.html<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eandrew/ecj/01/webrev.01/make/build.xml.udiff.html>
> >
>
> That patch is in OpenJDK:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/langtools/rev/2aa3a1cdb094
>
> > Here is my initial post on this
> >
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/2009-August/006857.html
> >
> > If I remember correctly, there is a tool that is compiled by ant (the two
> in
> > the output), but it is not compiled with Java 5 byte code.  When ant
> tries
> > to run the tool you get that error.
> >
> > I would switch to using ecj, as you might be able to get past this issue,
> > there is another issue that will come up and ecj acts differently than
> javac
> > and you really need the ecj way of doing things.  This is my original
> email
> > on this:
> >
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/2009-August/006879.html
> >
>
> ecj is currently the only supported method for doing a build without
> --disable-bootstrap, but that may change in the future.
> Note that a normal OpenJDK build requires a Sun-based implementation
> of Java 6, due to dependence on com.sun classes and AWT classes that
> are part of the 1.6 specification.  We do our best to get round this
> for IcedTea bootstrapping, but that testing is based on ecj+gcj not
> Apple's products.
>

We appreciate this and believe the Icedtea infrastructure really is the best
method to bring Free Java to other platforms albeit in this case a not
purely free one. I guess with the Apple PPC we have no choice but to use
JDK5 which is a Sun based implementation. With the bsd port changes upstream
we wouldn't even have patching problems.

BTW, what is the safest make option that will not remove the patches I have
applied. I hand patched the portions of the patches that didn't work and
removed them from the make file after they succeeded. I didn't have much
luck with the make clean-patch option so I opted for this approach
eventhough this may not be the best approach.

It seems that so far I have been able to just fix problems and then run make
again without any problems but I'm not too advanced in my understanding of
the process and my approach so far is not very repeatable.

Eric

--
> Andrew :-)
>
> Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
>
> Support Free Java!
> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
> http://openjdk.java.net
>
> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/bsd-port-dev/attachments/20091116/9eae068c/attachment.html