RFR: 8014513: Sjavac doesn't detect 32-bit jvm properly

[Jonathan Gibbons]

For sjavac, you can push changes as long as a langtools reviewer has 
approved it.

-- Jon

On 06/10/2013 12:51 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Hello Kumar,
>
> I'm not sure if I need a sponsor for pushing, do I? I'm a jdk8 reviewer.
>
> Both of these changes still need to be properly reviewed by someone in 
> langtools, probably Jon. There will be additional work in the build 
> scripts to get sjavac default and the problems resolved for the JCE 
> team, but I will handle that in jdk8/build as usual.
>
> /Erik
>
> On 2013-06-07 22:52, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
>> Hi  Erik,
>>
>> I am so sorry I responded to the wrong email, I was referring to 
>> 8014513.
>> subj line corrected
>>
>> Kumar
>>
>>> Hi Erik,
>>>
>>> So what else needs to be done for this ?  I take it this has been 
>>> reviewed by Jon
>>> who is the most familiar with it. If all it takes is someone to 
>>> sponsor this push,
>>> I can do so, let me know.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Kumar
>>>
>>>> Here is a patch solving a problem with -sourcepath for sjavac.
>>>>
>>>> First some background. The security sources (the ones that require 
>>>> signing) need to be built to a separate directory. If they aren't 
>>>> (as is the case now) security tests will fail if run on the 
>>>> exploded jdk image (the one you get when just typing make or make 
>>>> jdk). In JDK-8009280, I'm trying to fix this. The solution I have 
>>>> for that bug is working well, except when running with sjavac, and 
>>>> basically builds all classes except the security classes first to 
>>>> the normal outputdir and then as a separate step builds just the 
>>>> security classes to a different outputdir.
>>>>
>>>> There are two issues that need to be addressed in sjavac for this 
>>>> to work. First, it needs to be possible to supply the same source 
>>>> root both to the -src and -sourcepath option (but with different 
>>>> filter rules). Sjavac is very picky and only links to sources that 
>>>> are included in either of those options, and since we are excluding 
>>>> the security sources from -src, we need to add them to -sourcepath.
>>>>
>>>> The second thing is more of a bug as far as I can tell. Sjavac 
>>>> compares the found set of sources to compile with what the makefile 
>>>> think needs to be compiled, as a safety check. Currently, sjavac is 
>>>> including sources that are just being linked to in this comparison. 
>>>> I would think that it should only include sources that are meant to 
>>>> be compiled.
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8015145/webrev.langtools.01/
>>>>
>>>> http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8015145
>>>>
>>>> /Erik
>>>
>>