Building jdk9 on Windows x64 and Visual Studio 2015 Communityedition

[Kumar Srinivasan]

I am good with this change!.

I would like the rest of the component teams to weigh in on the others.

Thanks
Kumar

On 12/16/2015 12:18 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> On 2015-12-16 16:33, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8145549-vs2015-community-edition/webrev.01/jdk/src/jdk.pack200/share/native/common-unpack/utils.h.udiff.html 
>>
>>
>> You are undefining Windows math.h OVERFLOW, what is it defined
>> as ? With you redefining this, will it cause problems for users of
>> this API, likely to affect JNI apps.
>>
>> Probably need to redefine the pack200 OVERFLOW constant to
>> something else, probably PACK200_OVERFLOW to prevent namespace
>> collisions.
>
> I agree, this is a better solution. I've updated the webrev with this 
> solution (although I used the name PSIZE_OVERFLOW to align with 
> PSIZE_MAX).
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8145549-vs2015-community-edition/webrev.02 
>
>
> /Magnus
>
>
>>
>> Kumar
>>
>> On 12/16/2015 5:35 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>>> On 2015-11-05 18:03, Timo Kinnunen wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>   I have signed the OCA and emailed a scan according the 
>>>> instructions. I separated the freetype changes into a separate 
>>>> batch as suggested. I have shared the patch files on OneDrive, they 
>>>> are my Public folder. Here’s the link to the folder: 
>>>> https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=a243a3e0b2aaacfa%21107
>>>>   The OneDrive folder should contain these 4 files:
>>>>   freetype_JDK9.patch
>>>> vs2015_JDK9.patch
>>>> vs2015_JDK9_hotspot.patch
>>>> vs2015_JDK9_jdk.patch
>>>>   The first two target the root repository, the other two are for 
>>>> hotspot and jdk repositories, respectively.
>>>>   I rebased the patches on JDK9 tip today. I           ran “make 
>>>> images” and fixed a couple of new errors that have appeared since 
>>>> the previous version. A couple of the changes I had made were also 
>>>> not needed any more.
>>>>   Please have a look!
>>> Hi Timo,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry for the long delay.
>>>
>>> I have created JDK-8145548 for the freetype fix. I'm sponsoring this 
>>> fix. I'll send out a proper review on cr.openjdk.java.net shortly.
>>>
>>> The vs2015 changes are more complicated since they touch multiple 
>>> places in the code. Also, your patch had started bitrotting slightly 
>>> during my long response time. I'm trying to fix it up, and will post 
>>> a review when I have sorted everything out. I will verify that the 
>>> change does not break any of our supported platforms, but I'd like 
>>> you to verify that the patch still works on VS2015. When I publish 
>>> the webrev, there will be a download link to the patch file.
>>>
>>> Also, this patch touches both hotspot code and multiple jdk modules, 
>>> so it will need to be reviewed by other groups as well, besides the 
>>> build team.
>>>
>>> /Magnus
>>>
>>>>             Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>>>>
>>>> From: Magnus Ihse Bursie
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 17:13
>>>> To: timo.kinnunen at gmail.com;build-dev
>>>> Subject: Re: Building jdk9 on Windows x64 and Visual Studio 2015 
>>>> Communityedition
>>>>     On 2015-09-25 17:55, timo.kinnunen at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I’ve been going over the Windows build of the whole JDK for a 
>>>>> while with VS 2015 and now I have patches that allow the build to 
>>>>> complete.
>>>>>
>>>>> I’ve made changes in the root repository as well as in hotspot and 
>>>>> jdk repositories. The changes fall broadly in three categories: 
>>>>> enabling the v140 toolchain and improving freetype compilation, 
>>>>> adding casts to where pointers are truncated and miscellaneous 
>>>>> small-scale code changes.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch to the root repository streamlines handling of freetype 
>>>>> by implementing a default source directory at $HOME/freetype under 
>>>>> Cygwin. It is checked during configure and used for compiling if 
>>>>> “--with-freetype-src” is not specified. A help message giving the 
>>>>> unpacking command with the correct directory is also included. 
>>>>> This patch is about 90 lines without counting 
>>>>> generated-configure.sh changes.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patches to jdk and hotspot contain native code changes only 
>>>>> and no changes to make-files. These are about 580 and 290 lines, 
>>>>> respectively. All patches are generated with “hg diff -g”.
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you be willing to incorporate these? How should I proceed 
>>>>> with this?
>>>>   Hi Timo,
>>>>   First of all, I apologize that you have not recieved any response 
>>>> for
>>>> far too long. :-(
>>>>   Thank you for your interest in helping to improve OpenJDK!
>>>>   In general, a patch to allow compilation on           VS 2015 
>>>> Community edition
>>>> sounds like a good edition to OpenJDK. I am willing to sponsor this
>>>> patch and help you work with getting it accepted.
>>>>   My first question to you is: have you signed the OCA? Also, unless
>>>> you've done so already, reading http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ 
>>>> is a
>>>> good start for starting to contribute to OpenJDK.
>>>>   However, supporting a new compiler, without at the same time 
>>>> breaking an
>>>> older one, can sometimes be tricky business. This means that you might
>>>> need to iterate your patch a number of times, until it's suitable for
>>>> inclusion. I don't want to scare you away, just be realistic up front
>>>> that it might require some more work from your part (and our!). Also,
>>>> (FYI, we have recently upgraded the compilers used at Oracle to VS2013
>>>> SP4, so I know what I'm talking about...)
>>>>    From what you write, I think you should try           to 
>>>> separate the
>>>> freetype-src default directory from the compiler upgrade settings. The
>>>> former might be easier to start with, as it's less likely to be
>>>> disruptive for anything else.
>>>>   Also, at this point, I think it would be helpful for me to be 
>>>> able to
>>>> have an initial look at the patches. You need to be an OpenJDK 
>>>> Author to
>>>> be able to access the OpenJDK infrastructure, so unfortunately that is
>>>> not available to you. :-( For a first peek, the patches can be 
>>>> provided
>>>> just about any way (but attachments to this list is unfortunately not
>>>> allowed). For a final, proper, code review they need to reside on our
>>>> infrastructure, but at that point I can help with fixing that.
>>>>   /Magnus
>>
>