Fwd: Re: How to decrease size of j2sdk_image

[David Holmes]

>> On 10/11/12 9:09 AM, matchew wrote:
>>> Understand. But why still when ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS is set
>>> to 0 these files are generated?

Because you have to set FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS=0 when invoking make, not 
ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS=0. From the makefiles:

# The Full Debug Symbols (FDS) default for VARIANT == OPT builds is
# enabled with debug info files ZIP'ed to save space. For VARIANT !=
# OPT builds, FDS is always enabled, after all a debug build without
# debug info isn't very useful. The ZIP_DEBUGINFO_FILES option only has
# meaning when FDS is enabled.
#
# If you invoke a build with FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS=0, then FDS will be
# disabled for a VARIANT == OPT build.
#
# Note: Use of a different variable name for the FDS override option
# versus the FDS enabled check is intentional (FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS
# versus ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS). For auto build systems that pass
# in options via environment variables, use of distinct variables
# prevents strange behaviours. For example, in a VARIANT != OPT build,
# the FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS environment variable will be 0, but the
# ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS make variable will be 1. If the same
# variable name is used, then different values can be picked up by
# different parts of the build. Just to be clear, we only need two
# variable names because the incoming option value can be overridden
# in some situations, e.g., a VARIANT != OPT build.

David
-----

>> What type of build are you doing? The ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS
>> flag only disables the feature for "product bits" builds. For a
>> JDK build that is an "OPT" build. For a HotSpot build that is a
>> "product" build.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 2012/10/11 Daniel D. Daugherty <daniel.daugherty at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:daniel.daugherty at oracle.com>>
>>>
>>> On 10/11/12 8:50 AM, matchew wrote:
>>>> what about openjdk builds used for example by ubuntu package
>>>> manager (default repos)? these builds do not have these
>>>> debug files (*.diz) at all.
>>>
>>> I don't know how Ubuntu builds the OpenJDK repos so I can't
>>> really comment on why those builds don't have debug info files.
>>> Downstream projects can change the default settings and several
>>> of the downstream Linux project have enabled even more debug
>>> info in their builds.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If i am not considering jvm/jdk native code debugging is it
>>>> safe to just remove them all?
>>>
>>> It's your build. If you don't think you need the debug info, then
>>> you can remove it.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2012/10/11 Daniel D. Daugherty <daniel.daugherty at oracle.com
>>>> <mailto:daniel.daugherty at oracle.com>>
>>>>
>>>> On 10/11/12 3:21 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
>>>>> Moving this off discuss mailing list to build-dev.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why is ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS being set to 1 for
>>>>> many product builds now ? It slows down the build and
>>>>> creates increased bundle size even though the majority
>>>>> of users do not require this functionality.
>>>>
>>>> The Full Debug Symbols feature will eventually be
>>>> enabled for all
>>>> OSes for which Oracle generates bits. I think MacOS X is
>>>> the last
>>>> platform and that work is tracked by:
>>>>
>>>> 7165611 3/3 implement Full Debug Symbols on MacOS X
>>>>
>>>> The default setting for ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS is "1"
>>>> (enabled)
>>>> because the Full Debug Symbols feature is intentionally
>>>> enabled in
>>>> all promoted bits for diagnosibility and debuggability.
>>>> If FDS is
>>>> not enabled when the promoted bits are built, then the
>>>> debug info
>>>> generated by a rebuild of *exactly the same source* with
>>>> FDS enabled
>>>> cannot be (reliably) used with the promoted bits.
>>>>
>>>> You might be saying:
>>>>
>>>> That's fine for promoted bits, but what about the
>>>> rest of us?
>>>>
>>>> The answer there is actually simple. We want our
>>>> developer private
>>>> builds and automated system builds, e.g., JPRT, to match
>>>> what Release
>>>> Engineering builds. We don't want RE to be surprised by
>>>> an integration
>>>> that builds fine when FDS is disabled only to blow up
>>>> when FDS is
>>>> enabled.
>>>>
>>>> Similarly, we also don't want SQE/SQA to be surprised by
>>>> different
>>>> test results with bits built by RE versus bits built
>>>> with FDS disabled,
>>>> e.g., JPRT. Enabling "debug info" in a build changes the
>>>> compiler
>>>> optimizations and that changes the bits in the binary.
>>>> Those changes
>>>> in the binary might mask a bug that only shows up after
>>>> RE has built
>>>> with FDS enabled. Conversely, if you disable FDS in your
>>>> private build,
>>>> you might end up chasing a bug that only reproduces in
>>>> your private
>>>> build and doesn't reproduce in an FDS enabled build.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Could we consider flipping the default for
>>>>> ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS to 0 ? (like I've done for
>>>>> all my build scripts?)
>>>>
>>>> For the reasons I stated above, no we won't change the
>>>> default for
>>>> ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS to "0" (disabled) unless
>>>> Oracle changes
>>>> the way that promoted bits are built.
>>>>
>>>> You are welcome to disable the feature in your private
>>>> builds which
>>>> is why I added the ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS flag.
>>>> However, please
>>>> remember that any testing that you do with those bits
>>>> won't necessarily
>>>> match testing done with the official promoted bits.
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Sean.
>>>>>
>>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>>> Subject: Re: How to decrease size of j2sdk_image
>>>>> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 14:57:46 +0800
>>>>> From: Weijun Wang <weijun.wang at oracle.com>
>>>>> <mailto:weijun.wang at oracle.com>
>>>>> To: discuss at openjdk.java.net
>>>>> <mailto:discuss at openjdk.java.net>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You can try set ENABLE_FULL_DEBUG_SYMBOLS to 0.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Max
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/11/2012 02:38 PM, matchew wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > After successful openJDK7 build (Ubuntu 12.04) i have found that
>>>>> > 'j2sdk-image' has 240MB. More than 100MB belongs to one directory:
>>>>> > openjdk7/jre/lib/amd64
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Can anyone explain me why it is so big? For example in openJDK7
>>>>> installed
>>>>> > via package manager this folder has only 18MB
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Is there any way to decrease its size?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thanks in advance
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > Mateusz
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>