Proposal: Upgrade compiler version for Windows

[Ivan Krylov]

Yes, VS2003 works OK even on Windows 8.1

On 12 Feb 2014, at 01:56, Alex Kasko <mail at alexkasko.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I think it would be great to ditch VS2003 to not have license problems and backporting incompatibilities like this - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/2013-December/003163.html
> 
> But I am more concerned about amd64 version. I guess Windows Server 2003 Platform SDK support also will be ditched in spite of not having license problems?
> 
> Also VS2010 Express is a "registerware" may be it's better to use free Windows SDK 7.1 (from VS as a "toolset" or separate) as it is already mandatory for jdk7 amd64 "free" builds?
> 
> PS: as a side-note, VS2003 works fine (at least for builds, not sure for the development) on Windows 7 SP1.
> 
> On 02/10/2014 08:13 PM, Phil Race wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> My goal here was just to point out some of the issues/scope etc so that you
>> and the present openjdk6 maintainers can decide how to proceed.
>> BTW you had written ' to accommodate usage of Visual Studio 2010 "
>> which I read as meaning allow in addition to VS 2003, not replace it.
>> 
>> -phil.
>> 
>> On 2/10/2014 12:05 PM, Ivan Krylov wrote:
>>> Phil,
>>> 
>>> First, I do have a license for VS2003. And more so, one can by vs2003
>>> for some third party stores, it is just that Microsoft does not sell
>>> or support VS2003.
>>> The build problem with the compiler version is not my personal one.
>>> 
>>> There is a good point about figuring out what set of builds/tests
>>> could be considered comprehensive. There is no JPRT in the open. We do
>>> test 32 and 64 bit builds.
>>> I do not have a solution that would retain compatibility with VS2003.
>>> And the changes that I have borrow quite a bit of native code in
>>> windows/native/java/net and awt/java2d for openjdk7. This might have
>>> impact with regards to bug-to-bug compatibility with existing builds
>>> of OpenJDK6 for Windows.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Ivan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/02/2014 23:42, Phil Race wrote:
>>>> There was a lot of work to the build system and source code
>>>> to upgrade JDK7 to VS2010. Whilst a good chunk of that work was
>>>> in closed repositories you will still find a fair amount to do ..
>>>> 
>>>> As many as we could find/remember about got a 'vs2010' label
>>>> So the query
>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20JDK%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20vs2010
>>>> 
>>>> probably should also give some perspective on  some of the bugs/changes
>>>> but doesn't give a detailed picture of the build updates needed.
>>>> You would need to test 32 & 64 bit on preferred build platforms
>>>> and ensure its builds with the free SDK as well as VS.
>>>> And will your patch mean that people who have Vs2003 and a set up
>>>> that works be broken? How will you test that if you don't have VS2003
>>>> Plus where you make changes to  shared build files you'll need to ensure
>>>> builds on other platforms aren't broken either.
>>>> So a lot of building and testing and follow-on fixing will result
>>>> from that
>>>> 'patch' which makes for a non-trivial amount of work for a release
>>>> that's getting old.
>>>> 
>>>> -phil.
>>>> 
>>>> On 2/10/2014 11:17 AM, Omair Majid wrote:
>>>>> * Ivan Krylov <ivan at azulsystems.com> [2014-02-10 13:57]:
>>>>>> The build system for OpenJDK6 for Windows uses Visual Studio 2003.
>>>>>> This is a problem for those who do not have a license as you may not
>>>>>> purchase this software anymore.
>>>>> Ouch.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The proposal is to modify the build systems and somewhat sources to
>>>>>> accommodate usage of Visual Studio 2010
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If that is something openjdk6 community is interested in I could
>>>>>> contribute a patch.
>>>>> I don't work on Windows, so I will let others who use it and develop on
>>>>> it chime in.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am also unfamiliar with the logistics here: seems that not all
>>>>>> changes in OpenJdk6 have corresponding bug entries in OpenJDK bug
>>>>>> database.
>>>>> Yeah. It's a bit of a historical accident. When Oracle stopped
>>>>> developing OpenJDK 6, the rest of us decided that we need a public bug
>>>>> tracker and settled on https://java.net/jira/browse/OPENJDK6. We still
>>>>> use the original bug ids for backports, but OpenJDK6-specific bugs get
>>>>> this new-style bug id.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Should RFR be simply sent to this list?
>>>>> Yeah, this list will probably be the best place to post patches
>>>>> specific
>>>>> to OpenJDK6 only. It will probably be better if the RFR brings the
>>>>> build
>>>>> system closer to that of OpenJDK 7, which lists Visual Studio 2010 as
>>>>> the official compiler [1].
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Omair
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/raw-file/dada8003df87/README-builds.html#msvc32
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -Alex
>