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

[Xiomara Jayasena]

On Dec 22, 2008, at 3:00 PM, Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew at member.fsf.org 
 > wrote:

> 2008/12/22  <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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> The source itself may have remained the same, but the zip file itself
> changed, necessitating another download and changes in IcedTea.

The contents in the source should not have changed, although the zip  
was regenerated and has a new date. Yes,   to be able to have jdk 7  
build 42 the bits dated 12/19 would be needed.

-Xiomara

>
> -- 
> Andrew :-)
>
> Support Free Java!
> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
> http://openjdk.java.net
>
> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8