New build system problems

[David Holmes]

On 26/02/2013 11:43 PM, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> Martin,
>
> On 2013-02-26 02:10, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>> I'm willing to let someone else on build-dev take over this change, or I
>> can implement some clear policy.
>> It seems reasonable to do:
>>
>> windows => cl
>> solaris => cc gcc
>> anything else => gcc cc
>>
>> With environment variables to allow experimental use of
>> insane^Wunsupported compilers.
>>
>> Do we have consensus on that?
>
> Sounds good for me.

Me too. But I think we need to wait to hear from build-infra folk (as I 
understand it Erik is away at present).

David

> -Dmitry
>
>
>>
>> Martin
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Dmitry Samersoff
>> <dmitry.samersoff at oracle.com <mailto:dmitry.samersoff at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>      1. for windows compiler checklist become:   cl cc gcc
>>
>>      I'm not sure we need to check for cc on windows, also gcc build on
>>      windows is not supported. So It might be better to be more explicit:
>>
>>       256   COMPILER_CHECK_LIST="cc gcc"
>>             # Overriding COMPILER_CHECK_LIST to set OS specific preferences
>>       257   if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_OS" = "xmacosx"; then
>>       258     # Do not probe for cc on MacOSX.
>>       259     COMPILER_CHECK_LIST="gcc"
>>       260   fi
>>       261   if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_OS" = "xwindows"; then
>>       262     COMPILER_CHECK_LIST="cl"
>>       263   fi
>>
>>
>>      2. Not all versions of test support == as equation. It's better to use
>>      single one. and I would prefer to have quotes around xmacosx and
>>      xwindows just for consistency. i.e.
>>
>>      if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_OS" = "xwindows";
>>
>>      -Dmitry
>>
>>
>>      On 2013-02-24 00:05, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>      > Hi Erik, Tim, Kelly
>>      >
>>      > Here's a proposed fix for you to review:
>>      >
>>      >
>>      http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk8/COMPILER_CHECK_LIST/
>>      >
>>      > Martin
>>      >
>>      > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Martin Buchholz
>>      <martinrb at google.com <mailto:martinrb at google.com>>wrote:
>>      >
>>      >> I was trying out the shiny new build system.
>>      >>
>>      >> Problem: configure is not executable - must run bash ./configure
>>      >> It's traditional for configure scripts to be executable.
>>      >>
>>      >> Problem: Your life is hell if you have a non-compiler "cl"
>>      command on your
>>      >> PATH, even on Linux.
>>      >>
>>      >> checking for cl... /usr/bin/cl
>>      >> configure: Resolving CC (as /usr/bin/cl) failed, using /usr/bin/cl
>>      >> directly.
>>      >>
>>      >> with subsequent failure to compile.
>>      >>
>>      >> Even if you specify the compiler explicitly, it doesn't help:
>>      >>
>>      >> CC=/usr/bin/gcc CXX=/usr/bin/g++ bash ./configure
>>      >>
>>      >> Of course, one can work around this by creating a "tools dir", but
>>      >> excising the unloved cl from the configure script is tempting and
>>      effective.
>>      >>
>>
>>
>>      --
>>      Dmitry Samersoff
>>      Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia
>>      * Give Rabbit time, and he'll always get the answer
>>
>>
>
>