RFR: 8351309: test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/posixSig/TestPosixSig.java fails on static-jdk

[Jiangli Zhou]

On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 09:22:44 GMT, Doug Simon <dnsimon at openjdk.org> wrote:

>>> It seems we agree that we need, at some point, to have a high-level discussion on if libjsig should be supported on static builds, and if so, how it should be implemented. We also agree that having signal chaining enabled by default on our static JDK builds are incorrect.
>> 
>> Thumbs up.
>> 
>>> 
>>> However, I suggest we chose a simple path, were we utilize the framework for not building a static library that we do not use (this is already done for several libraries that are not included in the static JDK image), while you suggest we keep compiling it, even if we do not include it and test it.
>>> 
>>> I don't get the point of this. If we don't include it, and don't test it, then surely it would be better to not even build it now?
>> 
>> We have no current usages of libjsig in our current hermetic Java testing and prototype development work. So I don't have related concerns if don't produce a `libjsig.a` in the `static-libs` for the short term. Let's check with @dougxc and others from GraalVM side to make sure that they are okay with removing `libjsig.a` from the static libs bundle, before making any changes.
>
>> Let's check with @dougxc and others from GraalVM side
> 
> @wirthi or someone from the Native Image team will comment on this. Thanks for the heads up.

> > Let's check with @dougxc and others from GraalVM side to make sure that they are okay with removing libjsig.a from the static libs bundle, before making any changes.
> 
> Hi @jianglizhou,
> 
> Native image has no use for `libjsig.a` and we are fine if it is not part of static libs bundle.

Thanks for the feedback!

While making the change suggested by @magicus , I realize it `libjsig.a` is still included in the static libs bundle (at least not affect by the current change). It only exclude `libjsig.a` for `java.base` module-included-libs.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23924#issuecomment-2711490133