RFR: JDK-8001931 The new build system whitespace cleanup

[Tim Bell]

Hi Magnus:

I read the .patch files since that was the best way to see everything.

Massive set of changes, but this looks good to me it if builds. Approved.


Tim

> I found a couple of more places with the same issue, all in the jdk 
> repository.
>
> New webrev for jdk: 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8001931-build-infra-whitespace-cleanup/jdk/webrev.02
>
> Webrev showing diff between this and previous webrev: 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8001931-build-infra-whitespace-cleanup/jdk/webrev.diff-01-02
>
> /Magnus
>
> On 2013-10-08 13:55, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Resending, since it seems to have disappeared on the way. Sorry if it 
>> reaches you twice.
>>
>> On 2013-10-08 11:53, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>> I've just started looking into this, but if I understand point 5:
>>>
>>> 5) Non-shell commands in a recipe (e.g. comments and make directives 
>>> like ifdef) must not start with tab, but should instead be indented 
>>> to the same level as the surrounding shell commands using spaces 
>>> (with tabs interpreted as 8 spaces wide).
>>>
>>> correctly, the changes to jdk/makefiles/BuildJdk.gmk for example 
>>> should be:
>>>
>>>  gensrc-only:
>>>          +$(MAKE) -f GenerateJavaSources.gmk
>>> -#        Ok, now gensrc is fully populated.
>>> +        # Ok, now gensrc is fully populated.
>>>
>>> (i.e. comments should be indented to the same level as the 
>>> surrounding commands) instead of:
>>
>> Yep, you are absolutely correct. We have missed that one.
>>
>> Actually, the we didn't realize from the start that it was possible 
>> to get the same visual indentation level for comments in recipes by 
>> using leading spaces instead of tabs, so in our original form our 
>> guidelines stated that comments in recipes should be like the one you 
>> found in BuildJdk.gmk -- that is, the # at the first column, and the 
>> rest of the comment indented "inside" the comment to the same level. 
>> But that is of course not as good, and was something we only thought 
>> was necessary due to makefile syntax.
>>
>> There might be more places were we have used the "old" rule for 
>> comments in recipes. I'll do a search in the code base and see if 
>> there are any more.
>>
>> Thank you for pointing this out!
>>
>> /Magnus
>>
>
>