From spoole at linux.vnet.ibm.com Tue Jul 12 14:51:50 2011 From: spoole at linux.vnet.ibm.com (Steve Poole) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 22:51:50 +0100 Subject: Progress? Message-ID: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Hi Kelly, Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) Cheers, Steve From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Tue Jul 12 23:58:19 2011 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:58:19 +0200 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: <4E1D420B.9070405@oracle.com> Hello Steve, I'm currently working on it, but the project unfortunately got stuck between vacations and paternity leave and I'm trying to piece together the prototype work that has been done and doing some prototyping of my own. The idea from the start was to push often (but so far we haven't pushed anything and we are sorry about that). Right now I rather not push other peoples half done work. After the summer things will likely get moving again. /Erik On 2011-07-12 23:51, Steve Poole wrote: > Hi Kelly, > > Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? > > (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and > memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) > > > Cheers, > > Steve From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Wed Jul 13 00:06:37 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (=?utf-8?B?bmV1Z2Vucy5saW1hc29mdHdhcmVAZ21haWwuY29t?=) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:06:37 +0200 Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IFByb2dyZXNzPw==?= Message-ID: <4e1d4409.4144d80a.0a5f.3cd7@mx.google.com> Is there any help you guys need? I would be very happy to help out as I would like to base this work for a QNX based JDK. Mario -- Sent from HTC Desire... pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF http://www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ ----- Reply message ----- Da: "Erik Joelsson" Data: mer, lug 13, 2011 08:58 Oggetto: Progress? A: Hello Steve, I'm currently working on it, but the project unfortunately got stuck between vacations and paternity leave and I'm trying to piece together the prototype work that has been done and doing some prototyping of my own. The idea from the start was to push often (but so far we haven't pushed anything and we are sorry about that). Right now I rather not push other peoples half done work. After the summer things will likely get moving again. /Erik On 2011-07-12 23:51, Steve Poole wrote: > Hi Kelly, > > Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? > > (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and > memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) > > > Cheers, > > Steve From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 13 09:13:05 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 09:13:05 -0700 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: > Hi Kelly, > > Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and have them do the push themselves. I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. -kto > > (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) > > > Cheers, > > Steve From ahughes at redhat.com Wed Jul 13 09:43:16 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Andrew John Hughes) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:43:16 +0100 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 09:13:05AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: > > > Hi Kelly, > > > > Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? > > Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( > > We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and > have them do the push themselves. > > I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, > but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. > One thing at a time would be better... :-) > -kto > > > > > > (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Steve > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 13 11:23:19 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:23:19 -0700 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 09:13:05AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >> >> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: >> >>> Hi Kelly, >>> >>> Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? >> >> Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( >> >> We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and >> have them do the push themselves. >> >> I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, >> but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. >> > > One thing at a time would be better... :-) But the order might be important. When we completely re-write the makefile logic, the BSD/MAC makefile changes will not be of any value. But if we see these changes first, we can make sure the new makefile logic works for it. The jigsaw/modularity changes to the build system is a bit further off, and it's not clear how this will impact the build changes we have planned, but the general feeling is that it will be much better in the new world since we want to try and build the java packages in parallel, with different destinations, which should be better for modular builds. -kto > >> -kto >> >> >>> >>> (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Steve >> > > -- > Andrew :) > > Free Java Software Engineer > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > Support Free Java! > Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > http://icedtea.classpath.org > PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From ahughes at redhat.com Wed Jul 13 13:18:35 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Andrew John Hughes) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:18:35 +0100 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:23:19AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: > > On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 09:13:05AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: > >> > >> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Kelly, > >>> > >>> Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? > >> > >> Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( > >> > >> We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and > >> have them do the push themselves. > >> > >> I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, > >> but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. > >> > > > > One thing at a time would be better... :-) > > But the order might be important. > > When we completely re-write the makefile logic, the BSD/MAC makefile changes will not be of any > value. But if we see these changes first, we can make sure the new makefile logic works for it. > Ah, good point. I didn't think of that. I don't see a problem as long as they are separate changesets. I just have nightmares of a single huge unfathomable changeset coming in... > The jigsaw/modularity changes to the build system is a bit further off, and it's not clear how this > will impact the build changes we have planned, but the general feeling is that it will be much better > in the new world since we want to try and build the java packages in parallel, with different destinations, > which should be better for modular builds. I'm certainly looking forward to this 'new world'. Is it all done behind the scenes? Or is there still stuff to work on? It would be nice if there was some 'TODO' list so others (like me) could get involved if there's still work to be done. There seems to be little to no collaboration work between Oracle and external contributors at present (I don't mean accepting/reviewing patches, but in working on the same project) and it would be good to see this change. > > -kto > > > > >> -kto > >> > >> > >>> > >>> (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) > >>> > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> Steve > >> > > > > -- > > Andrew :) > > > > Free Java Software Engineer > > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > > > Support Free Java! > > Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > > http://icedtea.classpath.org > > PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > > Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 13 14:10:57 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:10:57 -0700 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: On Jul 13, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:23:19AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >> >> On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 09:13:05AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >>>> >>>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Kelly, >>>>> >>>>> Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? >>>> >>>> Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( >>>> >>>> We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and >>>> have them do the push themselves. >>>> >>>> I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, >>>> but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. >>>> >>> >>> One thing at a time would be better... :-) >> >> But the order might be important. >> >> When we completely re-write the makefile logic, the BSD/MAC makefile changes will not be of any >> value. But if we see these changes first, we can make sure the new makefile logic works for it. >> > > Ah, good point. I didn't think of that. > > I don't see a problem as long as they are separate changesets. I just have nightmares > of a single huge unfathomable changeset coming in... Yes, we will need to try and organize the changesets in some kind of sane way. > >> The jigsaw/modularity changes to the build system is a bit further off, and it's not clear how this >> will impact the build changes we have planned, but the general feeling is that it will be much better >> in the new world since we want to try and build the java packages in parallel, with different destinations, >> which should be better for modular builds. > > I'm certainly looking forward to this 'new world'. > > Is it all done behind the scenes? Or is there still stuff to work on? The issue is that Fredrik, the primary engineer doing the common work, is on leave, planned, but unexpectedly early, he should be back soon. And he is in Stockholm too, so timezones create a few issues working closely on it. I will be in Stockholm the first week of August to try and get something going, maybe send out some introduction emails too. I am a little reluctant to speak for Fredrik on his work, but I had hoped that once he pushed his initial changesets into the build-infra/jdk7 area, multiple people could start in on understanding it more, maybe help convert any areas of the jdk we miss at first, and definitely test it out and see how it works. The build-infra/jdk7 repositories are jcheck-free so no CRs are required as we whack away at it to get it right, but I've seen what Fredrik has done as the 'common' logic and I want that in place before we throw more people at the problem. We won't go near jdk8 until we have it all working well, and correct. So we await the new 'common' logic, then we can start beating on it and completing the assimilation. > > It would be nice if there was some 'TODO' list so others (like me) > could get involved if there's still work to be done. There seems to > be little to no collaboration work between Oracle and external > contributors at present (I don't mean accepting/reviewing patches, but > in working on the same project) and it would be good to see this change. Separate from the actual makefile changes, I had hoped we could create some kind of jdk image comparison tool that could work on all platforms. Something that would accept two jdk image trees (built with different makefiles) and compare the files, layout, and file contents, reporting on any differences. Besides comparing the more obvious things, like filenames and layouts, it would need to rip apart jar and zip files and compare manifests, class files, etc. And I was thinking that for binary files maybe decompile the code or do some kind of text/data section comparisons so we could verify we have the same image. Of course it's not jdk specific really, and I haven't seen anything out there that is platform independent or capable of doing windows and solaris and linux native binaries. If we had such a tool, we could feel more confident that makefile changes were safe. If anyone has any ideas on that, I'd like to hear them. In the past we haven't been very good about doing any kind of inventory check on the built images, and the jdk/make/common/Release.gmk file needs to be jettisoned into space. :^( Of course, jdk8 will likely have a completely different image structure than jdk7 due to the modularity work, but it will still need to be legacy aware somehow. When we get to that stage, I'll need help from others, but we are a ways from that yet. -kto > > >> >> -kto >> >>> >>>> -kto >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Andrew :) >>> >>> Free Java Software Engineer >>> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) >>> >>> Support Free Java! >>> Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea >>> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath >>> http://icedtea.classpath.org >>> PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) >>> Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 >> > > -- > Andrew :) > > Free Java Software Engineer > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > Support Free Java! > Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > http://icedtea.classpath.org > PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From littlee at linux.vnet.ibm.com Fri Jul 15 00:03:11 2011 From: littlee at linux.vnet.ibm.com (Charles Lee) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:03:11 +0800 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <4E1FE62F.2080500@linux.vnet.ibm.com> On 07/14/2011 05:10 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: > On Jul 13, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:23:19AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >>> On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 09:13:05AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >>>>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Kelly, >>>>>> >>>>>> Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? >>>>> Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( >>>>> >>>>> We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and >>>>> have them do the push themselves. >>>>> >>>>> I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, >>>>> but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. >>>>> >>>> One thing at a time would be better... :-) >>> But the order might be important. >>> >>> When we completely re-write the makefile logic, the BSD/MAC makefile changes will not be of any >>> value. But if we see these changes first, we can make sure the new makefile logic works for it. >>> >> Ah, good point. I didn't think of that. >> >> I don't see a problem as long as they are separate changesets. I just have nightmares >> of a single huge unfathomable changeset coming in... > Yes, we will need to try and organize the changesets in some kind of sane way. > >>> The jigsaw/modularity changes to the build system is a bit further off, and it's not clear how this >>> will impact the build changes we have planned, but the general feeling is that it will be much better >>> in the new world since we want to try and build the java packages in parallel, with different destinations, >>> which should be better for modular builds. >> I'm certainly looking forward to this 'new world'. >> >> Is it all done behind the scenes? Or is there still stuff to work on? > The issue is that Fredrik, the primary engineer doing the common work, is on leave, > planned, but unexpectedly early, he should be back soon. > And he is in Stockholm too, so timezones create a few issues working closely on it. > I will be in Stockholm the first week of August to try and get something going, > maybe send out some introduction emails too. > > I am a little reluctant to speak for Fredrik on his work, but I had hoped that once he pushed > his initial changesets into the build-infra/jdk7 area, multiple people could start in on understanding > it more, maybe help convert any areas of the jdk we miss at first, and definitely test it out and > see how it works. The build-infra/jdk7 repositories are jcheck-free so no CRs are required as > we whack away at it to get it right, but I've seen what Fredrik has done as the 'common' logic > and I want that in place before we throw more people at the problem. > > We won't go near jdk8 until we have it all working well, and correct. > So we await the new 'common' logic, then we can start beating on it and completing > the assimilation. > >> It would be nice if there was some 'TODO' list so others (like me) >> could get involved if there's still work to be done. There seems to >> be little to no collaboration work between Oracle and external >> contributors at present (I don't mean accepting/reviewing patches, but >> in working on the same project) and it would be good to see this change. > Separate from the actual makefile changes, I had hoped we could create some kind of > jdk image comparison tool that could work on all platforms. > Something that would accept two jdk image trees (built with different makefiles) and > compare the files, layout, and file contents, reporting on any differences. > Besides comparing the more obvious things, like filenames and layouts, it would need to > rip apart jar and zip files and compare manifests, class files, etc. > And I was thinking that for binary files maybe decompile the code or do some kind of > text/data section comparisons so we could verify we have the same image. > > Of course it's not jdk specific really, and I haven't seen anything out there that is > platform independent or capable of doing windows and solaris and linux native > binaries. > > If we had such a tool, we could feel more confident that makefile changes were safe. > > If anyone has any ideas on that, I'd like to hear them. > > In the past we haven't been very good about doing any kind of inventory check on the > built images, and the jdk/make/common/Release.gmk file needs to be jettisoned into space. :^( > Of course, jdk8 will likely have a completely different image structure than jdk7 due to > the modularity work, but it will still need to be legacy aware somehow. When we get to > that stage, I'll need help from others, but we are a ways from that yet. > > -kto > >> >>> -kto >>> >>>>> -kto >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve >>>> -- >>>> Andrew :) >>>> >>>> Free Java Software Engineer >>>> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) >>>> >>>> Support Free Java! >>>> Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea >>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath >>>> http://icedtea.classpath.org >>>> PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) >>>> Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 >> -- >> Andrew :) >> >> Free Java Software Engineer >> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) >> >> Support Free Java! >> Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea >> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath >> http://icedtea.classpath.org >> PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) >> Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 Hi Kelly, Would you please share us more about the 'common work' and 'common logic' things? Will it only include parallel making? What about other features we have discussed some time ago? On which repository we will see these changes? I have two machines waiting for any help I can give on this issue :-) -- Yours Charles From spoole at linux.vnet.ibm.com Fri Jul 15 14:42:31 2011 From: spoole at linux.vnet.ibm.com (Steve Poole) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 22:42:31 +0100 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <4E20B447.8070108@linux.vnet.ibm.com> On 13/07/11 22:10, Kelly O'Hair wrote: > On Jul 13, 2011, at 1:18 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:23:19AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >>> On Jul 13, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 09:13:05AM -0700, Kelly O'Hair wrote: >>>>> On Jul 12, 2011, at 2:51 PM, Steve Poole wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Kelly, >>>>>> >>>>>> Its seems to have all gone quiet on the infra project. What's up? >>>>> Vacations, Paternity leaves, and getting jdk7 out the door distractions. :^( >>>>> >>>>> We considered pushing in changes while people were out, but it was decided to wait and >>>>> have them do the push themselves. >>>>> >>>>> I'm also wondering if we should be pulling in the BSD and Mac port logic in at the same time, >>>>> but that will require setting up BSD and Mac build systems. Just a thought. >>>>> >>>> One thing at a time would be better... :-) >>> But the order might be important. >>> >>> When we completely re-write the makefile logic, the BSD/MAC makefile changes will not be of any >>> value. But if we see these changes first, we can make sure the new makefile logic works for it. >>> >> Ah, good point. I didn't think of that. >> >> I don't see a problem as long as they are separate changesets. I just have nightmares >> of a single huge unfathomable changeset coming in... > Yes, we will need to try and organize the changesets in some kind of sane way. > >>> The jigsaw/modularity changes to the build system is a bit further off, and it's not clear how this >>> will impact the build changes we have planned, but the general feeling is that it will be much better >>> in the new world since we want to try and build the java packages in parallel, with different destinations, >>> which should be better for modular builds. >> I'm certainly looking forward to this 'new world'. >> >> Is it all done behind the scenes? Or is there still stuff to work on? > The issue is that Fredrik, the primary engineer doing the common work, is on leave, > planned, but unexpectedly early, he should be back soon. > And he is in Stockholm too, so timezones create a few issues working closely on it. > I will be in Stockholm the first week of August to try and get something going, > maybe send out some introduction emails too. > > I am a little reluctant to speak for Fredrik on his work, but I had hoped that once he pushed > his initial changesets into the build-infra/jdk7 area, multiple people could start in on understanding > it more, maybe help convert any areas of the jdk we miss at first, and definitely test it out and > see how it works. The build-infra/jdk7 repositories are jcheck-free so no CRs are required as > we whack away at it to get it right, but I've seen what Fredrik has done as the 'common' logic > and I want that in place before we throw more people at the problem. > > We won't go near jdk8 until we have it all working well, and correct. > So we await the new 'common' logic, then we can start beating on it and completing > the assimilation. > >> It would be nice if there was some 'TODO' list so others (like me) >> could get involved if there's still work to be done. There seems to >> be little to no collaboration work between Oracle and external >> contributors at present (I don't mean accepting/reviewing patches, but >> in working on the same project) and it would be good to see this change. > Separate from the actual makefile changes, I had hoped we could create some kind of > jdk image comparison tool that could work on all platforms. > Something that would accept two jdk image trees (built with different makefiles) and > compare the files, layout, and file contents, reporting on any differences. > Besides comparing the more obvious things, like filenames and layouts, it would need to > rip apart jar and zip files and compare manifests, class files, etc. > And I was thinking that for binary files maybe decompile the code or do some kind of > text/data section comparisons so we could verify we have the same image. > > Of course it's not jdk specific really, and I haven't seen anything out there that is > platform independent or capable of doing windows and solaris and linux native > binaries. > > If we had such a tool, we could feel more confident that makefile changes were safe. Amazingly, I wrote such a tool a few years ago (and it was in Java too) I may still have it around somewhere. Let's suppose I find it or that we write a new one - where would be put the source? Is there a OpenJDK tools repo? > If anyone has any ideas on that, I'd like to hear them. > > In the past we haven't been very good about doing any kind of inventory check on the > built images, and the jdk/make/common/Release.gmk file needs to be jettisoned into space. :^( > Of course, jdk8 will likely have a completely different image structure than jdk7 due to > the modularity work, but it will still need to be legacy aware somehow. When we get to > that stage, I'll need help from others, but we are a ways from that yet. > > -kto > >> >>> -kto >>> >>>>> -kto >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> (I've just taken ownership of a new laptop with lots of cores and memory and I'd love to use it to build OpenJDK in parallel !) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve >>>> -- >>>> Andrew :) >>>> >>>> Free Java Software Engineer >>>> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) >>>> >>>> Support Free Java! >>>> Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea >>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath >>>> http://icedtea.classpath.org >>>> PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) >>>> Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 >> -- >> Andrew :) >> >> Free Java Software Engineer >> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) >> >> Support Free Java! >> Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea >> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath >> http://icedtea.classpath.org >> PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) >> Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Fri Jul 15 15:23:48 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:23:48 -0700 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <4E1FE62F.2080500@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <4E1FE62F.2080500@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: Currently there is very little sharing of makefile logic between the repositories. The current plan is to create a common area, in the top repository for now, and use that makefile logic in the other repositories. It will likely include more than just the parallel build logic. The existing makefile and ant logic in the various repositories has little in common, and the jdk makefiles in particular is a nested makefile design, which we want to get away from. The dependencies on the makefile targets has also been rather sloppy in the past which prevents build with 'make -j N' from being reliable, and creates unreliable incremental builds. This work is now in the developer's private work area, so when we make it public we will try and explain things in more detail. -kto On Jul 15, 2011, at 12:03 AM, Charles Lee wrote: > Hi Kelly, > > Would you please share us more about the 'common work' and 'common logic' things? Will it only include parallel making? What about other features we have discussed some time ago? On which repository we will see these changes? > > I have two machines waiting for any help I can give on this issue :-) > > -- > Yours Charles From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Fri Jul 15 15:57:10 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:57:10 -0700 Subject: Progress? In-Reply-To: <4E20B447.8070108@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4E1CC1F6.1090206@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <9501698B-8FDF-4514-83DD-9C34F7776B53@oracle.com> <20110713164315.GF16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <06409DCD-DF16-478B-B030-CD6843D53BF8@oracle.com> <20110713201835.GN16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <4E20B447.8070108@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: <15A1BD62-160A-48B6-9C07-92AC52FA2C9F@oracle.com> On Jul 15, 2011, at 2:42 PM, Steve Poole wrote: >> Separate from the actual makefile changes, I had hoped we could create some kind of >> jdk image comparison tool that could work on all platforms. >> Something that would accept two jdk image trees (built with different makefiles) and >> compare the files, layout, and file contents, reporting on any differences. >> Besides comparing the more obvious things, like filenames and layouts, it would need to >> rip apart jar and zip files and compare manifests, class files, etc. >> And I was thinking that for binary files maybe decompile the code or do some kind of >> text/data section comparisons so we could verify we have the same image. >> >> Of course it's not jdk specific really, and I haven't seen anything out there that is >> platform independent or capable of doing windows and solaris and linux native >> binaries. >> >> If we had such a tool, we could feel more confident that makefile changes were safe. > > Amazingly, I wrote such a tool a few years ago (and it was in Java too) I may still have it around somewhere. > Let's suppose I find it or that we write a new one - where would be put the source? Is there a OpenJDK tools repo? If you have a tool to contribute that would be great, I would tend to put it in the top repository, in a make/tools directory. But perhaps we should give it a spin first? The jdk repository has a make/tools directory for java tools, but if a tool has value to more than one repository, it seems like we should place it in a the common share area. There has been some debate about whether we need a separate common or sharing repository, and not use the top repository for these things. For now, I'm not so concerned about that, we can discuss that strategy when it gets time to officially integrate into jdk8. So for the time being I was assuming that the top repository of build-infra/jdk7 is a fine place. -kto