ITW to build with jdk9 post b41

[Fridrich Strba]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello, Jiří,

On 06/02/15 12:41, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> instead of +export JACOCO_OPERATOR_EXEC=$(SYSTEM_JRE_DIR)/bin/java 
> $(COVERAGE_JAVA_ARGS) -cp
> $(JACOCO_OPERATOR_DIR):$(JACOCO_CLASSPATH):. 
> org.jacoco.operator.Main
> 
> you have
> 
> +export JACOCO_OPERATOR_EXEC=$(SYSTEM_JRE_DIR)/bin/java 
> $(EMMA_JAVA_ARGS) -cp $(JACOCO_OPERATOR_DIR):$(JACOCO_CLASSPATH):. 
> org.jacoco.operator.Main
> 
> Please fix.

Done in the attached patch, along with one hanging dependency for one
of the clean targets.

> Also one thing to think about -
> 
> you changed my: +JUNIT_RUNTIME:=$(JUNIT_JAR) $(HAMCREST_JAR) ... 
> (eg) +       $(call composeclasspath, $(JUNIT_RUNTIME) 
> $(TEST_EXTENSIONS_DIR)) \
> 
> to
> 
> +      $(call composeclasspath, $(JUNIT_JAR) $(HAMCREST_JAR) 
> $(TEST_EXTENSIONS_DIR)) \
> 
> I'm wondering what is better.
> 
> I would vote for my approach - as you specify junit_runtime once.
> If junit runtime will be redefined again,  the the change will be
> needed only on one space.

I have no strong opinion about this one. I put back the JUNIT_RUNTIME.
We only have to be sure that we keep in mind that they are space
separate segments and not to use it ever without the joinsegment call.

> btw - your joinsegments is really cool :) I never realized this 
> approach! ty!

Yeah, when I was working on this, I realized that without something
like this we were likely to meet some illegally looking classpath or a
- -classpath followed by another option in certain cases. So, these
macros were looking like the only way to be more or less protected
against this kind of problems.

> As for emma - I wonted to remove those two vars too, but then I
> noted that those are also hardcoded in several (remaining) targets,
> and was lazy to doublecheck  it all again.

Some of the tests take a file, rename it to _noEmma then run test,
then again rename the result to _withEmma and the original _noEmma to
something without suffix. This operations might be possible to kill,
but then, I think one can do it in a follow-up patch, since this
change starts to be somehow long :)

> Please fix the issue with  $(COVERAGE_JAVA_ARGS) x
> $(EMMA_JAVA_ARGS) Although I preffere "my junit_runtim" approach,
> I'mnot going to force you. Feel free to use which you think is
> better.

OK, fixed in the attached patch.

> After rhose solved, ok for head (actually - considering release
> date of jdk9 - only head, oook?)

If one can backport to 1.5, I would not be against, but then I can do
it myself and keep the patch around.

> Do you wont to get push access or are you ok with me pushing for
> you?

Whichever is better for you. I don't mind push access, but then I
would need some briefing about changelogs and other similar things, so
that I don't screw up the established order. So, you can push as you
desire.

F.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlTUxfEACgkQu9a1imXPdA/mGwCbBDz7Ag+MVzHc89xmxj278dB2
skAAn2OY9MSptxHf3111r1M4XAminQYN
=H82e
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: icedtea-web-java9_3.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 40057 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20150206/fce802e5/icedtea-web-java9_3-0001.patch>