RFR: 8211296: Remove HotSpot deprecation warning suppression for Mac/clang

[Mikael Vidstedt]

> On Oct 4, 2018, at 2:18 PM, Kim Barrett <kim.barrett at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Oct 4, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> That all assumes that static build actually works at all; it doesn’t look like we
>>> test that configuration these days, so who knows what bit rot may have set in.
>>> 
>> 
>> No, we don't test static build, and never have. I'd be surprised if it's still possible to build a static build. 
>> 
>> This was a feature developed for the mobile project. The static build part was merged, somewhat hastily, into mainline, but the rest of the mobile code is still lingering in the mobile project fork. 
>> 
>> The entire "static build" concept was somewhat artificially injected in some parts of the build code. It is for instance not possible to build all modules with a static build. At the very least you need to build without java.desktop, if I remember correctly. 
>> 
>> The motivation for the static build is that on iOS, apps are not allowed to load dynamic libraries (for some reason only Apple knows). So a developer that wants to build a Java app needs to have a static library version of the entire JDK to link with into a single executable Java launcher. So in this perspective, the entire use of dlopen in a static build smells funny, and might be just a left-over from static build being more of a hack than a properly supported build option. 
>> 
>> /Magnus
> 
> The "static build" doesn't build anymore. We're all shocked that this
> untested configuration has bit-rotted. :)
> 
> LoadJavaVM uses RTLD_NOW in the normal (non-"static build") case, the
> workaround is superfluous in that case. Given that, I'm going to
> delete the workaround and file an RFE [1] to fix or remove the
> currently broken "static build" support, with a comment there
> referring to this workaround code as possibly being relevant to fixing
> the static build.

I’m glad to see this gone. Looks good!

Cheers,
Mikael

> 
> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211732
> 
> New webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kbarrett/8211296/open.01/
>