Progress?

[Charles Lee]

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