Pls review 6813274 (M)

[Paul Hohensee]

Thanks for the review.  I'll remove the profiled targets.

Tom suggests that instead of adding many new targets, I use KERNEL=1
on the command line, as the 64-bit builds use LP64=1.  I'd need to keep the
kernel targets though, because the otherwise the jdk build would have to
specify KERNEL=1 like it specifies ARCH_DATA_MODEL=64 now
(it turns ARCH_DATA_MODEL=64 into LP64=1).  I'll try that out
and see how it goes.

Paul

John Rose wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Paul Hohensee wrote:
>
>> Webrev and comments at
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/6813274/6813274/webrev.00/
>
> It looks fine.
>
> Now that we are adding more buildtree targets, it is a perfect time to 
> get rid of the 'profiled' flavor, since you are changing the set of 
> buildtree targets.
>
> I made the 'profiled' target at the Dawn of Java Time, in the old days 
> when profiling code on Unix required special compilation options.  It 
> was lightly used then and is (AFAIK) never used now.
>
> If someone is desperate to make a build with special profiling flags, 
> they can set the same environmental variables that profiled.make 
> does.  It is the same use case as for anybody that wants to add 
> compile-time flags to the mix; use EXTRA_CFLAGS, etc.  But having 
> 'profiled' as a separately defined target is useless noise.
>
> (One annoyance continually reminds me of the existence of 'profiled':  
> I keep bumping into it with pathname completion, when I am aiming at 
> the product directory.)
>
> -- John