Need reviewer: NONFCS_BUILD_INFO to add to the non-fcs version string
Kelly O'Hair
kelly.ohair at oracle.com
Mon Nov 29 14:22:45 PST 2010
JPRT will set USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX, just like everybody else. ;^)
Effectively you should not see a difference, assuming I change JPRT
before you see this change. ;^)
-kto
On Nov 29, 2010, at 11:10 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> Kelly,
>
> So what JPRT version string will be?
>
>
>
> Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>> John,
>> Can you or someone from the hotspot team review the hotspot part of
>> this:
>> 6987107: Add NONFCS_BUILD_INFO variable to add to but not modify
>> MILESTONE in version string
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk7/nonfcs-version2/webrev/
>> -kto
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>> *From: *"Kelly O'Hair" <kelly.ohair at oracle.com>
>>> *Date: *November 24, 2010 18:14:48 PM PST
>>> *To: *David Holmes <David.Holmes at oracle.com>
>>> *Cc: *John Coomes <John.Coomes at oracle.com>, David Katleman <david.katleman at oracle.com
>>> >, build-dev <build-dev at openjdk.java.net>,
>>> "christine.lu at oracle.com Lu" <christine.lu at oracle.com>
>>> *Subject: **Re: Need reviewer: NONFCS_BUILD_INFO to add to the non-
>>> fcs version string*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 24, 2010, at 6:06 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>
>>>> Kelly O'Hair said the following on 11/25/10 11:38:
>>>>> On Nov 24, 2010, at 4:08 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> Ok. So why not just USER_BUILD_INFO or CUSTOM_BUILD_INFO ?
>>>>>> There's really no tie to "FCS" or not. In fact why not use
>>>>>> USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX - see below ..
>>>>> It's just a name, but we were looking for a name that told you
>>>>> it would be ignored if MILESTONE=fcs.
>>>>
>>>> I see - that's not obvious from the webrev. I guess somewhere in
>>>> there is some "magic" MILESTONE treatment. That said for a real
>>>> fcs build I expect the complete version strings to specified by
>>>> the "release" process on the build invocation not defaulting to
>>>> whatever is in the Makefiles.
>>>
>>> The whole way the versions are defined is a bit confusing, tricky
>>> stuff. Probably need a serious revamping someday.
>>> But in general, yes, if MILESTONE=fcs most values come from the
>>> command line or RE scripts.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX would work, and your suggestion below works
>>>>> too, although I still want to
>>>>> export USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX so that shell logic isn't repeated
>>>>> over and over, hard on windows systems.
>>>>
>>>> I'm still unclear to where you are exporting this value? One of
>>>> the doc makefiles utilizes USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX but doesn't need
>>>> it to be exported presently.
>>>
>>> The jdk makefiles are heavily nested, make running make, and these
>>> Defs files are repeatedly parsed over and
>>> over, maybe 100's of times for a top level Makefile?
>>> The export pushes the variable into the environment so that the
>>> lower nested makefiles see the definition
>>> as an environment variable and if you use ifndef then you avoid
>>> the recalculations or shell execs.
>>> Solaris/Linux aren't bothered by the excessive execs that much,
>>> but Windows suffers from it.
>>> I've been trying to lower the total exec count when the Defs files
>>> are parsed to make windows builds faster.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'll need to change all NONFCS_BUILD_INFO to USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX
>>>>> in the hotspot files.
>>>>> That also cures John's complaint about the "fcs" name too.
>>>>> Check this one out:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ohair/openjdk7/nonfcs-version2/webrev/
>>>>
>>>> I can give Thumbs Up as is.
>>>
>>> OK.
>>>
>>> -kto
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>> -kto
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When full builds of jdk7 are done, we wanted a single variable
>>>>>>> that would add some extra identification string to all version
>>>>>>> strings.
>>>>>>> Hudson systems and JPRT can use this to uniquely identify all
>>>>>>> full builds so that testing teams can report an exact build on
>>>>>>> bugs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see. I'm not sure why you re-export the variable here
>>>>>> (jdk/.../Defs.gmk) as it doesn't appear to get used anywhere
>>>>>> else:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + ifndef NONFCS_BUILD_INFO
>>>>>> BUILD_DATE := $(shell $(DATE) '+%Y_%m_%d_%H_%M')
>>>>>> CLEAN_USERNAME := $(shell $(ECHO) "$(USER)" | $(TR) -d -c
>>>>>> '[:alnum:]')
>>>>>> USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX := $(shell $(ECHO) "$(CLEAN_USERNAME)_$
>>>>>> (BUILD_DATE)" | $(TR) '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' )
>>>>>> ! NONFCS_BUILD_INFO = $(USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX)
>>>>>> ! endif
>>>>>> ! export NONFCS_BUILD_INFO
>>>>>> ! FULL_VERSION = $(RELEASE)-$(NONFCS_BUILD_INFO)-$
>>>>>> (BUILD_NUMBER)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would seem a little simpler/cleaner to me to instead just do:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ifndef NONFCS_BUILD_INFO
>>>>>> BUILD_DATE := $(shell $(DATE) '+%Y_%m_%d_%H_%M')
>>>>>> CLEAN_USERNAME := $(shell $(ECHO) "$(USER)" | $(TR) -d -c
>>>>>> '[:alnum:]')
>>>>>> USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX := $(shell $(ECHO) "$(CLEAN_USERNAME)_$
>>>>>> (BUILD_DATE)" | $(TR) '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' )
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX := $(NONFCS_BUILD_INFO)
>>>>>> endif
>>>>>> FULL_VERSION = $(RELEASE)-$(USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX)-$(BUILD_NUMBER)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And this would be even simpler if USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX were the
>>>>>> variable that was set externally in the first place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ifndef USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX
>>>>>> BUILD_DATE := $(shell $(DATE) '+%Y_%m_%d_%H_%M')
>>>>>> CLEAN_USERNAME := $(shell $(ECHO) "$(USER)" | $(TR) -d -c
>>>>>> '[:alnum:]')
>>>>>> USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX := $(shell $(ECHO) "$(CLEAN_USERNAME)_$
>>>>>> (BUILD_DATE)" | $(TR) '[:upper:]' '[:lower:]' )
>>>>>> endif
>>>>>> FULL_VERSION = $(RELEASE)-$(USER_RELEASE_SUFFIX)-$(BUILD_NUMBER)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any why use the same NONFCS_BUILD_INFO for Hotspot and the
>>>>>>>> JDK when they typically report different version strings
>>>>>>>> anyway ???
>>>>>>> It's extra build information, not really a change in the
>>>>>>> component version number.
>>>>>>> -kto
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Aside from that, looks fine.
>>>>>>>>> -John
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 24, 2010, at 11:28 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2010-11-24 at 11:19 -0800, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I need a reviewer for this change:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 6987107: Add NONFCS_BUILD_INFO variable to add to but not
>>>>>>>>>>>> modify
>>>>>>>>>>>> MILESTONE in version string
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://javaweb.sfbay.sun.com/~ohair/webrevs/jdk7/nonfcs-version/webrev/
>>>>>>>>>>> Bit hard to review if the host isn't reachable :)
>>>>>>>>>>> Could you just attach the patch to your email,
>>>>>>>>>>> or post it on some publicly reachable machine?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/attachments/20101129/83e3bbf9/attachment-0001.html
More information about the hotspot-dev
mailing list