RFR: 8221610: Resurrect (legacy) JRE bundle target

[Erik Joelsson]

Looks good.

/Erik

On 2019-03-29 04:30, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>
> Hi Erik, Arno,
>
> thanks for reviewing and spotting the $(JDK_BUNDLE_EXTENSION) macro. I 
> simply forgot it because I was copying the original code as it was pre 
> JDK-8200132. At that time, there was no $(JDK_BUNDLE_EXTENSION) macro yet.
>
> I already verified that using $(JDK_BUNDLE_EXTENSION) will correctly 
> produce a zip bundle on Windows.
>
> I’ll test whether standard images will still get build (without 
> legacy) as requested by Erik before pushing.
>
> This is the updated webrev: 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8221610.1/
>
> Thanks
>
> Christoph
>
> *From:*Erik Joelsson <erik.joelsson at oracle.com>
> *Sent:* Donnerstag, 28. März 2019 15:54
> *To:* Zeller, Arno <arno.zeller at sap.com>; Langer, Christoph 
> <christoph.langer at sap.com>; build-dev at openjdk.java.net
> *Cc:* Schuenemann, Rene <rene.schuenemann at sap.com>
> *Subject:* Re: RFR: 8221610: Resurrect (legacy) JRE bundle target
>
> Hello,
>
> On 2019-03-28 04:47, Zeller, Arno wrote:
>
>     Hi Christoph,
>
>     thanks for the patch. Just one small suggestion – I think you
>     could use the same extension for jdk archive also for the jre
>     archive in make/autoconf/spec.gmk.in?
>
>     Something like this:
>
>     JRE_BUNDLE_NAME := jre-$(BASE_NAME)_bin$(DEBUG_PART).
>     $(JDK_BUNDLE_EXTENSION)
>
> I think this makes sense.
>
> Otherwise this looks ok to me. Have you verified that it still works 
> when not building any legacy-images and no legacy-image is present in 
> the build dir?
>
>     Otherwise you will have a difference between jdk and jre archives
>     on windows and zip might be more common on windows. I think to get
>     a real zip in the end you might need more changes.
>
> This is actually the only change needed. The makefile will figure out 
> the tool to use based on the extension.
>
>     Best regards,
>
>     Arno
>
>     *From:*Langer, Christoph
>     *Sent:* Donnerstag, 28. März 2019 10:07
>     *To:* build-dev at openjdk.java.net
>     <mailto:build-dev at openjdk.java.net>; Erik Joelsson
>     <erik.joelsson at oracle.com> <mailto:erik.joelsson at oracle.com>
>     *Cc:* Zeller, Arno <arno.zeller at sap.com>
>     <mailto:arno.zeller at sap.com>; Schuenemann, Rene
>     <rene.schuenemann at sap.com> <mailto:rene.schuenemann at sap.com>
>     *Subject:* RFR: 8221610: Resurrect (legacy) JRE bundle target
>
>     Hi build-dev,
>
>     today I’m coming up with kind of a backward oriented suggestion…
>     don’t know how well that would be received. Let’s see.
>
>     For JDK 11, with JDK-8200132 [0], the JRE build has been moved to
>     legacy.
>
>     There has been some discussion beforehand whether the JRE build
>     can completely be dropped or how far one can go removing the
>     support for it [1]. In the end the decision was made to at least
>     remove the JRE from the main targets and only offer some “legacy”
>     targets that would still build the JRE. Unfortunately, you were
>     under the assumption that nobody except Oracle would use the
>     bundle target and removed it as well [2]. Unfortunately, this
>     assumption was not quite true (and I was not there to raise my
>     concern ☹). In SapMachine builds, we use the bundle targets and we
>     are also still building JRE images for several stakeholders. So it
>     would really be good if we could get the JRE bundle target back.
>     At the moment we mimick the bundling in a shell script that is run
>     after the build.
>
> I'm happy to hear that this got use outside of Oracle!
>
> /Erik
>
>     So, I suggest to add back the BUILD_JRE_BUNDLE target in
>     Bundles.gmk and add an additional main target called
>     legacy-bundles which can be called for creating the JRE bundle.
>
>     Of course, this can go eventually when JRE support is finally
>     dropped for OpenJDK.
>
>     Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8221610.0/
>
>     Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221610
>     <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221610>
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Christoph
>
>     [0] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200132
>     <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200132>
>
>     [1]
>     https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2018-June/022249.html
>
>     [2]
>     https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2018-June/022274.html
>