RFR: JDK-6604021: RMIC is defaulting to BOOT jdk version, needs to be rmic.jar

[David Holmes]

On 16/10/2013 10:02 AM, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> Many thanks for jumping on this!
>
> On 16/10/2013 12:30 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Currently the RMI stubs in the jdk are built with the newly built rmic
>> binary at the end of the build. This patch changes that and instead
>> builds a bootstrap version of the rmic classes, much like bootstrap
>> javac in langtools, which runs on the bootjdk, but generates classes for
>> the new jdk. The new solution is more friendly to cross compilation.
>>
>> A few notes on the patch:
>>
>> * In src/share/classes/sun/tools/tree/Node.java, I had to change a call
>> to a jdk8 only constructor in java.lang.InternalError.
>
> A better fix to preserve the cause is:
>
> throw new InternalError().initCause(e);

That should be

throw (InternalError) new InternalError().initCause(e);

David
-----

>> * The packages included when compiling rmic were just picked by
>> extending for each missing class until the compilation succeeded. If
>> someone knows of a crucial package or class that needs to be included,
>> please say so.
>> * I renamed a parameter to SetupJavaCompilation. I do not consider the
>> parameter a hack anymore, but a necessary option for this case.
>
> So should "Don't use this. " say "Use with care." or something like
> that? :)
>
>> * In RMICompilation, the dependency file is now a real touch file
>> instead of a virtual one. This was needed for proper dependencies in
>> GenerateClasses.gmk.
>> * All of corba is compiled twice since I have no idea which parts would
>> actually be needed. This doesn't add much build time since it can be run
>> effectively in parallel with the rest of the corba build.
>
> I don't understand the need for changes here given that this is Java
> compilation and it is already using GENERATE_OLDBYTECODE ??
>
>> * I put the compilation of bootstrap rmic in GenerateClasses.gmk
>> directly instead of Tools.gmk. This was to not add much compile time,
>> since Tools.gmk is included and therefore parsed a lot.
>
> Seems okay - the proof of course is in the building.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6604021
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/6604021/webrev.01/
>>
>> /Erik