Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK source drop

[Ted Neward]

Related question: according to make sanity, it now looks for FindBugs, but I
don't find anything in the make README that describes why, or where to put
the FindBugs stuff.... When did this get added? B19 or 20? Is it going to
remain a part of the build going forward?

Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
http://www.tedneward.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: build-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net [mailto:build-dev-
> bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Ted Neward
> Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:13 PM
> To: Kelly.Ohair at Sun.COM
> Cc: Tim.Bell at Sun.COM; build-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: RE: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK source
> drop
> 
> Exactly. It might be a nice way around the binary plugs for those who
> don't
> care about that stuff.
> 
> Ted Neward
> Java, .NET, XML Services
> Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
> http://www.tedneward.com
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kelly.Ohair at Sun.COM [mailto:Kelly.Ohair at Sun.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:21 PM
> > To: Ted Neward
> > Cc: 'Christian Thalinger'; build-dev at openjdk.java.net;
> Tim.Bell at Sun.COM
> > Subject: Re: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK
> source
> > drop
> >
> > Good question... I'll explore that possibility, warn that no plugs
> are
> > available but build as much as possible kind of thing, right?
> >
> > -kto
> >
> > Ted Neward wrote:
> > > No promises heard, no expectations understood. :-)
> > >
> > > I personally have a hard time following the argument that says that
> > "because
> > > we put them into our source repository, we're asserting some kind
> of
> > legal
> > > license ownership" or something, but hey, I'm not a lawyer, either.
> > :-/
> > >
> > > Here's a Really Dumb Question(TM): Is it possible (and then, is it
> > > practical) to create a build that doesn't use any of the binary
> plugs
> > stuff?
> > > A stripped-down, JVM-and-core-classes-only kind of build that just
> > uses the
> > > core stuff that's out in the Sun-blessed open source domain? (I
> > haven't
> > > found that I cared about any of the binary plugs-related stuff yet,
> > so...)
> > >
> > > Ted Neward
> > > Java, .NET, XML Services
> > > Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
> > > http://www.tedneward.com
> > >
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Kelly.Ohair at Sun.COM [mailto:Kelly.Ohair at Sun.COM]
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:12 PM
> > >> To: Ted Neward
> > >> Cc: 'Christian Thalinger'; build-dev at openjdk.java.net;
> > Tim.Bell at Sun.COM
> > >> Subject: Re: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK
> > source
> > >> drop
> > >>
> > >> I would love for these binary plugs to go away, and second best,
> > make
> > >> them trivially available, but we are in legal territory here.
> > >> I will bring up this issue and see if we can't do what you
> suggest,
> > >> but I am not a lawyer, no promises.
> > >>
> > >> They are a royal pain, no argument there.
> > >>
> > >> -kto
> > >>
> > >> Ted Neward wrote:
> > >>> If they're going to change with every build release, then it's
> even
> > >> MORE
> > >>> important to make sure they're in some kind of source repository.
> > >> Otherwise,
> > >>> the whole point of keeping it in a source-code control repository
> > >>> (rollbacks, check out to a label, and so on) goes completely out
> > the
> > >> window
> > >>> when I can't get the corresponding binary plugs.
> > >>>
> > >>> I can't be the only one who grew up under the rule of source
> > control
> > >> that
> > >>> states, "Everything necessary to create a build must be stored in
> > the
> > >> source
> > >>> repository", can I?
> > >>>
> > >>> Ted Neward
> > >>> Java, .NET, XML Services
> > >>> Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
> > >>> http://www.tedneward.com
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: Christian Thalinger [mailto:twisti at complang.tuwien.ac.at]
> > >>>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 2:03 AM
> > >>>> To: Ted Neward
> > >>>> Cc: Tim.Bell at Sun.COM; build-dev at openjdk.java.net
> > >>>> Subject: RE: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK
> > >> source
> > >>>> drop
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sun, 2007-09-23 at 23:40 -0700, Ted Neward wrote:
> > >>>>> If they can't rest in the same repository, then perhaps a
> > different
> > >>>>> repository?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm just looking to be able to do a "svn up" (or its Mercurial
> > >>>> equivalent)
> > >>>>> and know that I've got everything I need to build the OpenJDK;
> > it's
> > >> a
> > >>>> lot
> > >>>>> more tedious to "svn up" then fetch the latest binary plugs
> > >>>> (particularly
> > >>>>> since I'm betting they're not going to change as frequently as
> > the
> > >>>> source
> > >>>>> does), and only then do a build.
> > >>>> That's wrong.  Every source build has it's matching binary plug.
> > >> See:
> > >>>> http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk7/
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - twisti
> > >>>>
> > >>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
> > >>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > >>>> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release
> Date:
> > >>>> 9/20/2007 12:07 PM
> > >>>>
> > >>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > >>> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date:
> > >> 9/20/2007
> > >>> 12:07 PM
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> No virus found in this incoming message.
> > >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > >> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date:
> > >> 9/20/2007 12:07 PM
> > >>
> > >
> > > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date:
> > 9/20/2007
> > > 12:07 PM
> > >
> > >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date:
> > 9/20/2007 12:07 PM
> >
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date:
> 9/20/2007
> 12:07 PM
> 
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.28/1021 - Release Date:
> 9/21/2007 2:02 PM
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1034 - Release Date: 9/27/2007
5:00 PM