RE-SPIN: JDK 7 build 42 is available at the openjdk.java.net website

[Xiomara.Jayasena at Sun.COM]

On 12/21/08 11:45, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> 2008/12/21 Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp.org>:
>   
>> On Sun, 2008-12-21 at 20:58 +0800, Max (Weijun) Wang wrote:
>>     
>>> I'm not a release engineer, but AFAIK, there are 3 kinds of builds
>>> here we can do at Sun:
>>>
>>> 1. Using only the opened repos:
>>>     Sorry, they do not build.
>>>
>>> 2. Using the opened repos plus the binary plugs:
>>>     Build OK, and -version shows openjdk...
>>>
>>> 3. Using the opened repos plus the closed repos:
>>>     Build OK, also emits the binary plugs, and -version shows JDK...
>>> This is probably the version you find on http://download.java.net/jdk7/binaries/
>>> .
>>>
>>> The two builds are probably using different environment variables also.
>>>       
>> Thanks Max.
>>
>> 1) is what we do with IcedTea, although we don't publish any binaries,
>> but the various distros do.
>>     
>
> No, the distro publish OpenJDK6 binaries not 7.
>
>   
>> 2) Where can I find these?
>> 3) Why are these not published under the same terms as the rest of
>> OpenJDK is?
>> Are these closed repos something different from the binary plugs in 2)?
>>
>>     
>>>> It seems the source bundle also changed its name.
>>>>         
>>> You mean the 19_dec date? I think this is because the whole build
>>> process generates source bundle, executable, and binary plug, and
>>> Xiomara's script automatically republishes all of them into multiple
>>> pages.
>>>       
>> Aha, yeah, that is probably it. I didn't have the old sources around, so
>> I couldn't compare. But since icedtea[7] is based on these source
>> releases the build broken when the source archive name changed.
>>
>>     
>
> The zip changed.  It's probably just internal date data, but the
> checksum changed as well as the filename and cmp shows the two to be
> different.
>   

To clarify -- for this re-spin:
1) The source remained the same.
2) Al l builds for all the eight platforms were re-built, so as to be 
able to publish all platform builds for build 42 with the same build 
number and date.
3) The linux 32/ 64 were built on the OS that were used prior to build 
42.  i.e. RH2.1 and SUSE 8.

The original build 42 bundles, binaries, etc. should be toss out and 
replace with the new build 42 bundles. 

I hope this adds clarity rather than confusion ;-)

-Xiomara

>   
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>