Fwd: Re: RFR(xxs): 8072935: Fix missing newline at end of file after 8067447

[Thomas Stüfe]

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Volker Simonis <volker.simonis at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I don't think we should enforce a minimum Version for GCC (actually we
> would have to enforce an exact version because the master builds at
> Oracle are only tested with exactly one compiler version - see
> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/Build/Supported+build+platforms).
>
> Different users have different requirements and if somebody for some
> reason has to use an older/newer version of GCC we shouldn't make that
> unnecessarily hard. But issuing a warning during the configure step
> would be fine for me.
>
> I think that compiling a project with different compilers or different
> versions of a compiler is a very good overall health check. In this
> case we detected a file without new-line at the end of files. I think
> everybody agrees this is something we do not want to have, no
> difference if it is objected by the official build tools.
>
> I'd like to propose a new test in jcheck instead which checks for this
> situation.
>
> Regards,
> Volker
>
>
I second that. Enforcing rules about a minimum compiler version would mean
unnecessarily closing the door on older compilers which are untested but
might still work fine, and forcing everyone to update. Which sometimes is
not
so easy in a corporate environent.

A softer approach (e.g. a jcheck warning, as Volker suggested) I like
better.

Kind Regards, Thomas



>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Erik Joelsson <erik.joelsson at oracle.com>
> wrote:
> > We don't have a minimum version currently. I agree that it would be a
> good
> > idea, but if we define one, wouldn't we also need to take responsibility
> of
> > testing that it keeps working?
> >
> > /Erik
> >
> >
> > On 2015-02-12 12:58, David Holmes wrote:
> >>
> >> Please see attached - do we have a minimum gcc version set in configure?
> >> If not, should we? I would think yes.
> >>
> >> David
> >
> >
>