RFR: JEP 367: Remove the Pack200 Tools and API

[Joe Darcy]

Hi Vicente,

It looks like the update to make/data/symbols/symbols removes the 
jdk.pack module from the history JDKs 9, 10, and 11 when --release is used.

If that is the case, it would be incorrect since historically the 
jdk.pack module was present in those releases.

Thanks,

-Joe

On 11/22/2019 1:30 PM, Vicente Romero wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 11/22/19 3:21 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 21/11/2019 19:53, Vicente Romero wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think I have covered all the proposed fixes so far. This is the 
>>> last iteration of the webrev [1], all the current changes are in 
>>> this one, the code hasn't been split into different webrevs. I'm 
>>> also forwarding to build-dev as there are some build related changes 
>>> too. The CSR for this change is at [2]
>> Would it be possible to summarize what will remain in 
>> test/jdk/tools/pack200 after this removal? The webrev makes it looks 
>> like badattr.jar is being added but since it already exists then I'm 
>> not sure whether to believe it. pack200-verifier/data/golden.jar is 
>> another one as it looks like JAR file that is generated by the tests 
>> today is being checked in, maybe `hg add` in error?
>
> I don't know why it is shown as added in the webrev, they have been 
> removed. I have published another iteration of the webrev at [1]
>>
>> The change to flags-cflag.m4 to add LP64=1 on Windows will need eyes, 
>> it's not immediately obvious to me which shared code compiled on 
>> Windows is impacted by this.
>
> yes probably this change is risky. I did it as the comment suggested 
> that the only reason the treatment for Windows was different was 
> because of pack200. But not sure if we can trust that comment. Should 
> I restore this code to its original state?
>>
>> -Alan
>
>
> Thanks,
> Vicente
>
> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8234542/webrev.03/