[RFR]: 8187004: No valid toolchains defined for BSD

[David Holmes]

On 31/08/2017 5:40 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:21 AM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com 
> <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 31/08/2017 5:08 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> 
>         On 08/31/2017 08:58 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> 
>             BSD is buildable for jdk9 in the separate, hardly-maintained
>             bsd-port only. :-(
> 
> 
>         That's what I guess as well after seeing that the "bsd"
>         directories within
>         the "jdk" structure are missing in the mainline tree. Then I
>         checked what
>         NetBSD is using as upstream and saw the reference bsd-port.
> 
>             I posted a set of patches for jdk9 mainline for building
>             jdk9 on BSD, that was
>             rejected. :( They ended up in the bsd-port, but this has not
>             been pushed upstream
>             to the mainline, and the bsd port is only sporadically
>             updated from mainline.
> 
> 
>         I think it won't hurt anyone if those patches are pushed
>         mainline. It seems that
>         most of the stuff lives inside its own directories, doesn't it?
>         If so, I don't
>         see any risk of breakage.
> 
>             Since those changes are either a) general cleanups that all
>             platforms should
>             benefit from, or b) no-risk bsd-only changes, I'd really
>             like to see them go into
>             the mainline build system.
> 
> 
>         I agree. I'm all for merging them. If someone has invested so
>         much work into
>         the port, it shouldn't just go to bitrot in bsd-port. It should
>         be merged
>         into the mainline tree.
> 
>             But for that to happen, we apparently need to change some
>             policy about
>             accepting code for platforms not tested by Oracle. :-(
> 
> 
>         I don't see why that should be necessary. I have sent in patches
>         for linux-sparc
>         and linux-zero in the past weeks and they were merged without a
>         hitch.
> 
> 
>     Those were very minor patches of two quite distinct kinds:
> 
>     1. Make zero work on platform Z
> 
>     This is something we can easily accommodate, and it generally
>     doesn't take much effort or disturb other platforms.
> 
>     2. Make the linux-sparc port work again
> 
>     This is somewhat more significant and does require community support
>     as otherwise this is an "orphaned" port. The fact it already exists
>     and was starting to bit rot means the acceptance bar is somewhat
>     lower. But there is still a question mark over longer term
>     commitment from the community for supporting this port.
> 
>         Patric told me on hotspot-dev that Oracle has no problems
>         accepting these
>         patches if they are maintained and tested by the community.
> 
> 
>     A full BSD port, not just Zero on BSD, requires a non-trivial level
>     of commitment from the community in terms of maintaining it etc,
>     before it can come into mainline. That is why we have the bsd-port
>     project - to establish that community and commitment. But AFAICS,
>     and from what was said when Magnus proposed this, that community is
>     not active.
> 
>     So unless something significant has changed with regards to the
>     bsd-port project and its supporting community, a full BSD port in
>     mainline seems unlikely.
> 
> 
> FWIW, I would love a first class BSD port. I think BSD is a valuable 
> platform to have.
> 
> The fact that different people at different times independently from 
> each other try to make this work, and that there seems to be an active 
> community of OpenJDK porters for BSD, seems to indicate there is enough 
> interest to keep this going. And then, maybe I am naive, but we are not 
> talking about new CPUs or a new GC, just another Posix compliant OS very 
> similar to the existing OSX. Would this really be so much effort?

It isn't a question of initial effort.

> 
>     But this should be discussed on porters-dev at openjdk.java.net
>     <mailto:porters-dev at openjdk.java.net> so that the porters group can
>     have its say.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, porters-dev is a ghost town. What about bsd-dev?

AFAIK the porters group should be the ones discussing this in general.

David

> Cheers, Thomas
> 
>     Cheers,
>     David
>     -----
> 
> 
>             The changes, btw, look good.
> 
> 
>         Thanks.
> 
>         Btw, I was chatting about OpenJDK on BSD yesterday on #netbsd in IRC
>         and I have learned that there are also several porters actively
>         working on OpenJDK on BSD. I will contact those guys and get them
>         to join build-dev@ and hotspot-dev at .
> 
>         There are definitely enough qualified and motivated developers who
>         want to work on OpenJDK for the platforms Oracle doesn't officially
>         support.
> 
>         Adrian
> 
>