--with-openjdk bootstrap

[DJ Lucas]

On 08/02/2010 10:44 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:

> It's been a long while since I went through LFS, but I remember I used
> to just build the initial gcc with gcj at the time.  Maybe that would be
> an option for some users? IcedTea shouldn't require much more than that.
> You can disable Rhino using --without-rhino.

Yes that would be possible.  I'm also not sure if it is possible to
build now without the symlinks provided by the gcj-compat package.  I've
honestly never tried it.  Is gcj and the third party jars all that are
required now?

>> I just figured I'd ask first before duplicating work that is already
>> done (and am glad that I did).  I'm going to take a look at the
>> --with-gcj-home option first, since that can be beneficial for more than
>> myself, and see if I can get that going, but I'll be poking around in 7
>> now as well, provide a local patch for the book if needs be.  :-)
>>
> 
> Let us know how you get on.  The eventual plan is to separate the options,
> so you'd have --disable-bootstrap and --with-jdk-home as in IcedTea7.

Funny, prior to that response, I was going to ask if --with-java-home
and --enable-bootstrap options would be useful to the project. :-)

I'll probably go ahead and go for the changes that you've already put
into 7 for a local patch (for my own use at first).  I want the option
of providing a fully self contained JDK (as has always been, though I
will loose a lot of the educational value), and I'll want it for 1.8.1
and then 1.9.  Seems a good place where I could help out a little.  I
imagine that it'll be too raw for 1.9 this close to a release, not sure
about after the fact for the branch though.

Given the time since those changes were made (July of 2009) and the
number of changes since (plus I've still got to find when --with-icedtea
came into the mix), I doubt that a true 'backport' by taking the
unaltered commits is possible (though I certainly could be wrong).  I
figure single stepping through commits to configure.ac from the time
that --with-icedtea went in will get me to most, if not all, of the
needed changes.  I'll be happy to break it down into pieces as I go
(I'll need to do this anyway).  Is there any more accounting info other
than the changeset numbers needed for a backport when the time comes for
1.10 (or 1.9.1 if deemed safe)?

Again, thank you very much for the suggestions and help so far, and
everyone involved for this project as a whole.

-- DJ Lucas

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.