Project Proposal: Build Infrastructure Changes

[Dmitry Samersoff]

On 2011-05-03 22:27, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> No doubt it's been useful, but seriously, you just built a hotspot for jdk7, with a completely different
> C++ compiler, and a different C++ runtime dependency, and you plop it down into a jdk6 image (that
> was built with a different C++ compiler, and maybe using a different C++ runtime) and you guys'
> expect it to work reliably? It doesn't, and likely won't run in a cross compile environment at all.

We did it for years for jdk 5 - HS reference platform for jdk5 is 
different from JDK one.

> The number of issues with that gamma/Queens makefile logic is too high, and it's not something we ship
> anyway. In my opinion, we should be restricting ourselves to building what we ship as part of the product,
> or what we need to make that build happen.
> So in my opinion, the whole thing needs to be moved to the hotspot/test area.

Generally I agree that gamma launcher should be in hotspot test but 
minimal "smoke" test at the end of the build is quite useful. The build 
system not always handle correctly incremental build and Queens test 
usually catch it at the earliest possible point.

So I would like to:

a) make gamma test JDK independent
b) move it to hotspot/test
c) keep it as part of build process

-Dmitry

-- 
Dmitry Samersoff
Java Hotspot development team, SPB04
* There will come soft rains ...