[aarch64-port-dev ] Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

[Bob Vandette]

> On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:12 AM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
> 
> 2017/4/4 1:04:22 -0700, magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com:
>> On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> ...
>>> 
>>>           JDK 8               JDK 9
>>>           -----               -----
>>> OS_NAME    Linux               linux
>>>           SunOS               solaris
>>>           Darwin              macos
>>>           Windows             windows
>>> 
>>> OS_ARCH    i386,x86            x86
>>>           i586,amd64,x86_64   amd64
>>>           sparcv9             sparcv9
>>>           arm                 arm32
>>>           aarch64             arm64
>> 
>> If we are making changes to the original proposal from JDK-8175819, then 
>> I just want to add my few cents:
>> 
>> Why change from the well-established "aarch64" to the virtually unused 
>> "arm64"? As far as I know, using the name "arm64" for the aarch64 
>> platform is something that has only been done in the (recently opened) 
>> closed Oracle port. This change, however, proposes to change the value 
>> in the release file even for the open aarch64 port, which has always 
>> been known by that name.
> 
> The trouble here is that "arm64" and "aarch64" are effectively synonyms
> for the ISA, but in the JDK we've wound up using them as the names of
> two different ports.

Well sort of …   We are only using arm64 as a configure option to enable building 
the unified ARM32/64 port and a label in Jira to identify which port a bug or RFE is related to.

Both 64-bit ARM ports have been using aarch64 for the os.name property
since day one and I think we should stick to this name in the release file to
avoid any confusion.  

Bob.

> 
> A JMOD file built for the 64-bit ARM architecture will (one hopes) run
> equally well on either port.  Which name should we use in JMOD files,
> "arm64" or "aarch64"?  My sense is that "arm64" is more immediately
> understood by developers at large even if "aarch64" is more correct
> in the eyes of ARM Holdings plc, but I could be wrong.
> 
> For what it's worth, the Linux distros aren't consistent: Debian-based
> distros use "arm64", while Red Hat / Fedora seem to prefer "aarch64".
> 
> - Mark