RFR: JEP 367: Remove the Pack200 Tools and API
Erik Joelsson
erik.joelsson at oracle.com
Fri Nov 22 21:41:56 UTC 2019
Hello,
On 2019-11-22 13:30, 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?
>>
That comment is most likely originating from the build-infra rewrite in
JDK 8. We probably added _LP64 on all platforms by mistake and noted
that it caused a difference in the pack200 binary, so corrected the new
build to mimic the old build. I wouldn't say just adding _LP64 on
Windows is correct because of this. It may be correct regardless, or it
may not.
In make/scripts/compare.sh $UNPACK200 is still referenced. Should
probably remove the whole section using it rather than just removing the
string "jdk.pack". I would assume the *.pack and *.pack.gz files are
long gone from any build.
/Erik
>> -Alan
>
>
> Thanks,
> Vicente
>
> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vromero/8234542/webrev.03/
More information about the build-dev
mailing list