Building OpenJDK 7 on Windows XP

[Kelly O'Hair]

It is a "BUILD" readme. The development requirements are a separate
thing, perhaps that should be documented in the development guide?

Yes, we should add "ant" as a build requirement, I'll fix that.

---

Trying to satisfy everyone with the build configurations is frustrating
to say the least.
If you drew a venn diagram of what everybody wants in the build system,
I'm not sure the overlapping parts are all that large. :^(

-kto

Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Kelly, Max,
> 
> That list mostly covers what you need for a build (Ant does not seem to 
> be present, required
> by langtools), but it bdoesn't cover everything you may need to work on 
> OpenJDK, and it
> doesn't particularly encourage a single shared tree.
> 
> As Max points out, you can get by with a single setting, but the 
> hierarchy is somewhat
> weird and betrays more than a little bit of its Sun history :-)  And, as 
> more tools get involved,
> the current system of lots of separate env variables might not scale well.
> 
> Although not required for the build, the page does not list additional 
> tools that may be required
> for working on OpenJDK -- Mercurial, official Mercurial extensions 
> (forest), OpenJDK Mercurial
> extensions (jcheck), other tools (FindBugs, etc)
> 
> -- Jon
> 
> 
> Max (Weijun) Wang wrote:
>> One setting is enough, if the directory structure is right:
>>
>> $ALT_SLASH_JAVA
>>    devtools
>>       share
>>          ant...
>>          findbugs...
>>          plugin
>>             mozilla_headers_18.win32...
>>       Windows
>>          DXSDK...
>>    re
>>       jdk
>>          1.6.0/archive/fcs/binaries/windows-i586...
>>          1.7.0/promoted/latest/binaries/windows-i586...
>>          (I hope the last 2 are correct)
>>
>> and, a very clean instruction:
>>
>> 1. Open the VC++.2003 Command prompt
>> 2. call c:\cygwin\cygwin.bat
>> 3. cd myjdk
>> 4. /cygdrive/c/precious/make380.exe
>>
>> Max
>>
>> On May 20, 2008, at 2:31 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>>>
>>> I tried to provide that list at:
>>>
>>>    
>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#windows 
>>>
>>>
>>> Did I miss the target somehow?
>>>
>>> -kto
>>>
>>>
>>> Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>>>> Martin,
>>>> I'd settle for just a *list* of all the tools you need, and have the 
>>>> JDK
>>>> build able to find all the tools given a minimum of ALT variable 
>>>> settings.
>>>> For licensing reasons, I suspect Sun cannot redistribute many of the 
>>>> tools,
>>>> but if the user could populate such a tree, then any version of OpenJDK
>>>> should be able to build with it, with perhaps just one ALT_TOOLS 
>>>> setting.
>>>> -- Jon
>>>> On May 19, 2008, at 9:02 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>>>> I propose that Sun create an externally-visible tree of binaries
>>>>> in the form that the JDK makefiles expect for ALT_SLASH_JAVA.
>>>>> Then OpenJDK developers could copy this tree to their development
>>>>> machine, set ALT_SLASH_JAVA to this directory, and most of
>>>>> the sanity warnings would evaporate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, this may not be possible for everything that is
>>>>> expected to be found in ALT_SLASH_JAVA.  E.g. Sun compilers
>>>>> probably cannot be provided this way, because of the usual
>>>>> requirement to have click-through licenses?!
>>>>> Perhaps Sun could aggregate a complete JDK development
>>>>> environment in one mega-tarball, protected by just one
>>>>> click-through license?
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps Sun could provide a known-to-work copy of Cygwin
>>>>> for JDK development.  The Cygwin project itself doesn't provide
>>>>> historic binaries, but if you install Cygwin by first downloading
>>>>> everything to disk, and then installing from there, you'll have
>>>>> a frozen-in-time set of Cygwin binaries that you can probably
>>>>> legally redistribute later when they've gotten the thumbs-up
>>>>> from Sun JDK development engineers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin
>>
>