HotSpot just got Hotter - IcedTea6 support for latest HotSpot

[Joe Darcy]

On 12/01/08 04:10 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 01/12/2008, Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp.org> wrote:
>   
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>>  I CCed hotspot-dev to see if the hotspot hackers can also provide some
>>  feedback (on picking the right hotspot version to ship by default).
>>
>>
>>  On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 17:37 +0000, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>  > I've added two new options to IcedTea6:
>>  >
>>  > --with-hotspot-build=x
>>  > --with-hotspot-src-zip=<path>
>>  >
>>  > When --with-hotspot-build is given, the build will attempt to use the
>>  > specified version of HotSpot.  The version numbers are contained in
>>  > the new file hotspot.map which maps build numbers to changesets. The
>>  > build number is also used in the name of some patches so correct
>>  > versions are applied.  This may yet be simplified to just do old/new.
>>  > Feedback welcome.
>>  >
>>  > With this patch, the build defaults to using hs14.0b08 (the current
>>  > OJ7 HotSpot) and will download this from hg.openjdk.java.net unless
>>  > --with-hotspot-src-zip is used.  --with-hotspot-build=original or
>>  > --without-hotspot-build will disable this and return to the existing
>>  > hs10.0b19 version.
>>
>>
>> Wow, this is pretty cool! It should make it much simpler to try out and
>>  use a newer hotspot with the stable, openjdk6 based, core.
>>
>>  I think that supporting more than 2, lets call them "stable" and
>>  "latest", might be a bit ambitious. We risk having to try to keep up
>>  with all the different versions and duplicating all our patches against
>>  more and more versions. This is also why I CCed hotspot-dev, hopefully
>>  they can advise on the best values for "stable" (what is used in update
>>  10 for example?) and "latest" (should be ok, but we wouldn't advise it
>>  for production yet).
>>
>>     
>
> I had similar thoughts as I was preparing the patch.  I think as a
> team we should keep support for two but maybe leave the infrastructure
> in place so if anyone else feels the urge they can add more.  In that
> vein, I'll probably rename '14.0b08' to 'latest'.
>
> 6u10 ships 11.0b15 which predates hg.  It might be in the old svn
> repositories somewhere, I didn't check your hg work on
> icedtea.classpath.org.  My hope would be that Sun move to this for the
> original bundle anyway.  We can then support that and the latest build
> fairly easily.  The latest has to be support by IcedTea7 anyway (which
> is what I used to create most of the 14.0b08 patches).
>
>   
>>  Ideally, we make sure that the "stable" version is the version
>>  backported also to openjdk6 itself. Or maybe 3 versions at most
>>  "openjdk6 base", "stable/production", "latest"?
>>
>>     
>
> As I say, I would hope Sun would make the first two equivalent in
> their bundles but they've already left us with an outdated HotSpot for
> quite a while (6u10 has been out a bit now).
>   

We will be publishing an OpenJDK 6 source bundle with HotSpot 11 later 
this week.  Since the inception of the OpenJDK 6 code base, I've 
generally kept the HotSpot published in OpenJDK 6 current with the 
HotSpot in the currently shipping 6 update release, with some delays as 
with this HS 10 to HS 11 transition.  Going forward, after the Mercurial 
transition for OpenJDK 6 the HotSpot team has committed to closer 
sharing of the HotSpot code bases for OpenJDK 6 and the 6 update release:

http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/2008-September/000150.html

-Joe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20081201/db4086f8/attachment.html