[PATCH FOR REVIEW]: Make source/target options explicit for CORBA bootstrap tools

[Andrew John Hughes]

2009/8/20 Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org>:
> 2009/8/20 Jonathan Gibbons <Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com>:
>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> 2009/8/18 Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org>:
>>
>>
>> 2009/8/18 Jonathan Gibbons <Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com>:
>>
>>
>> Andrew,
>>
>> If this is a patch for jdk7, it does not appear to be a patch to a recent
>> copy
>> of 7.
>>
>>
>> It's against b69 which is the latest release (from Friday).  The
>> patches are against the IcedTea forest so builds can be tested with
>> IcedTea as well.
>>
>> Specifically, you do not seem to have the recent changeset  to set
>>
>>
>> the source/target used to compile JDK to 7. [1]
>>
>>
>>
>> Er... yes I do:
>>
>> # Add the source level
>> LANGUAGE_VERSION = -source 7
>> JAVACFLAGS  += $(LANGUAGE_VERSION)
>>
>> # Add the class version we want
>> TARGET_CLASS_VERSION = 7
>> CLASS_VERSION = -target $(TARGET_CLASS_VERSION)
>> JAVACFLAGS  += $(CLASS_VERSION)
>> JAVACFLAGS  += -encoding ascii
>> JAVACFLAGS  += -classpath $(BOOTDIR)/lib/tools.jar
>> JAVACFLAGS  += $(OTHER_JAVACFLAGS)
>>
>> but these only cover the rt classes and not the bootstrap classes.
>>
>>
>>
>> While your patch does not directly conflict with any edits in that patch,
>> and
>> while the effect of your patch looks OK, in that patch I was extending the
>> precedent of TARGET_CLASS_VERSION to have an explicit macro for
>> (just) the version number, so that it is easy to change the value of (just)
>> the version number from the command line.
>>
>> With that in mind, I would suggest something like the following for your
>> patch:
>>
>> BOOT_SOURCE_LANGUAGE_VERSION = 6
>> BOOT_TARGET_CLASS_VERSION = 6
>> BOOT_JAVACFLAGS  += -encoding ascii -source $(BOOT_SOURCE_LANGUAGE_VERSION)
>> -target $(BOOT_TARGET_CLASS_VERSION)
>>
>>
>>
>> I didn't copy this for the 6 changes because I didn't immediately see
>> the point of using variables just for this single use.  I forgot that
>> it is possible to override these from the command line, so I've update
>> the patch:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/ecj/02/webrev.02/
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Jon
>>
>> [1]
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2009-July/001286.html
>>
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2009, at 5:24 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Currently the javac calls for building the bootstrap tools (not the
>> classes for the final JDK, which correctly now use source and target
>> 7) don't set an explicit source and target version.
>>
>> The webrev:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/ecj/02/webrev.01/
>>
>> sets these to 6 explicitly, as happens in the Ant builds performed by
>> langtools/jaxp/jaxws.  This is noticeable especially when using ecj as
>> the bootstrap javac as it defaults to a version < 1.5, and the build
>> fails.
>>
>> Ok to push?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this version now ok?  If so, I'll push it to the build gate using
>> the bug ID Kelly allocated for the same fix in JDK.
>>
>>
>> Andrew,
>>
>> I approve your webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/ecj/02/webrev.02/
>
> Thanks.  Pushed this last night:
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/corba/rev/8001ba2bf10d
>
>> My earlier confusion was caused by the fact that the corba Makefile is not
>> consistent with the jdk Makefile with respect to the use of
>> SOURCE_LANGUAGE_VERSION.
>> It would be good to (separately) fix that inconsistency, but that does not
>> affect the validity of what you propose here.
>>
>
> Yes, I see what you mean now.  Here's another webrev:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/consistency/01/webrev.01/
>
> which should make the two fairly consistent.  It brings in a lot of
> changes to the version in JDK that seem to have been missed from
> CORBA, namely:
>
>  * Turning off option outputs on fastdebug builds
>  * Supporting USE_HOTSPOT_INTERPRETER_MODE
>  * Supporting JAVAC_MAX_WARNINGS and JAVAC_WARNINGS_FATAL
>  * The SOURCE_LANGUAGE_VERSION sync above
>  * Include JAR_JFLAGS in BOOT_JAR_JFLAGS
>
> The following differences remain, which didn't seem appropriate to include:
>
> -JAVACFLAGS  += -classpath $(BOOTDIR)/lib/tools.jar
> +JAVACFLAGS  += "-Xbootclasspath:$(CLASSBINDIR)"
>  JAVACFLAGS  += $(OTHER_JAVACFLAGS)
>
>  # Needed for javah
> -JAVAHFLAGS += -classpath $(CLASSBINDIR)
> +JAVAHFLAGS += -bootclasspath $(CLASSBINDIR)
>
> I wasn't sure of the pros/cons of these changes but can easy add them if needed.
>
>> -- Jon
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>

Does this change look ok? Can I push it?

Thanks,
-- 
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