RFR (S): JDK-8222778: Packaging Tool (JEP 343) on Linux/AArch64

[Dmitry Chuyko]

On 7/18/19 11:57 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 7/17/19 10:19 PM, Dmitry Chuyko wrote:
>> On 7/17/19 11:52 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> This is weird:
>>>
>>> --- old/src/jdk.jpackage/linux/native/libapplauncher/LinuxPlatform.cpp	2019-07-16 22:11:30.200258978 +0300
>>> +++ new/src/jdk.jpackage/linux/native/libapplauncher/LinuxPlatform.cpp	2019-07-16 22:11:29.867374851 +0300
>>> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@
>>>    }
>>>
>>>    void LinuxPlatform::SetCurrentDirectory(TString Value) {
>>> -    chdir(PlatformString(Value).toPlatformString());
>>> +    int ignored = chdir(PlatformString(Value).toPlatformString());
>>>    }
>>>
>>> Firstly it does not fix the problem: you've gone from an unused value to an
>>> unused variable. Secondly, we ignore the return value of printf all the time;
>>> what's different about this one?
>> chdir() is __wur, which is /usr/include/aarch64-linux-gnu/sys/cdefs.h:#
>> define __wur __attribute_warn_unused_result__
> OK, got it.
>
>> In some places this warning is disabled (CoreLibraries.gmk,
>> Awt2dLibraries.gmk).
>>
>> It would be more correct to handle the result here as chdir might not
>> succeeded in fact.
> Very much so. We shouldn't try to "shut up the compiler" in this way.Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>

I created a separate bug about chdir() and write() usages: 
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228402

Does it look good to silence warnings for platforms support changes? One 
more option could be to exclude related changes from current review.

>
>> 'arvmv7hl' is a common build environment/target for arm port and looks
>> like a compatible option. We may look into VM binary metadata though to
>> get exact build arch.
> That would be wise.

getRpmArch() now asks rpmbuild to evaluate _target_cpu macro on current 
test host. That allows tests to find rpms that are created by the tool 
as it also uses default arch.

Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dchuyko/8222778/webrev.02/

-Dmitry

>