"j2sdk-image" and new build system

[David Holmes]

On 24/02/2013 5:32 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> David,
>
> May be we can cleanup names in makefiles, but add something
> like
>
>    restore_old_names()
>
> doing couple of mv calls to the end of build process.

The actual makefile changes are very small. The names are defined in 
spec.gmk.in. The only other references are in comments, the JPRT 
makefile and in creating the image name for profile JREs.

The problem is the outside systems that "know" what the build produces.

David

> -Dmitry
>
>
> On 2013-02-24 03:09, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 24/02/2013 4:19 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 2:45 AM, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
>>> <mailto:Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>      On 23/02/2013 10:29, David Holmes wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>          Just be aware there's a lot more involved in doing this than
>>>          just changing one a name in a makefile.
>>>
>>>      You beat to me too! Yes, there are likely a lot of scripts and paths
>>>      that assume the image name is j2sdk-image or j2re-image so renaming
>>>      will be a bit disruptive.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, but you are *already* making a huge disruptive change to build
>>> directory layout.  People have to change their scripts from
>>> linux-amd64/j2sdk-image
>>> to
>>> linux-x86_64-normal-server-release/images/j2sdk-image
>>
>> Not quite. You can still have full control of the first directory
>> component [1] so for most builds there is no change there at all and no
>> disruption.
>>
>> The additional images directory is also easily accommodated.
>> Scripts/processes that copy the images from path-A to path-B just need
>> to tweak path-A. But if you rename the actual j2sdk-image etc you have
>> to update everything that uses path-B.
>>
>>> Especially the repetition of "image" seems wrong in the new layout.
>>
>> The new build tries to have a top-level directory for each major build
>> component. Hence images has its own directory.
>>
>> David
>> -----
>>
>> [1] Simplest way is:
>>> mkdir mydir
>>> cd mydir
>>> <path-to-configure>/configure
>>
>>
>>
>>> Why not
>>> images/j2sdk-image
>>> to
>>> images/jdk
>>>
>>> If you really want to keep "j2sdk-image", move it back into its parent
>>> directory.
>>>
>>>      Also I think the initial goal of the new build system was to get it
>>>      to the point where it generated the "same bits" as the old build. I
>>>      assume this is why the new build went for the same directory names
>>>      as the old build (and probably because of scripts depending on the
>>>      name too).
>>>
>>>
>>> Hopefully the new build system will lead to an increase, not decrease,
>>> in overall sanity.
>
>