Dropping 32-bit support (was Branches)

[David Holmes]

On 22/02/2012 9:49 AM, Phil Race wrote:
> I was half suggesting that, half wondering. I suspect that most of the
> queries on the value
> of that flag are inside some "if <platform>" test so we may only need to
> make the OS X
> build path understand the combined setting for those cases, minimising
> the disruption.

Some of them are "generic" in hotspot (eg in the else of a !windows 
check or a !zero check). Didn't check JDK side.

David


> -phil.
>
> On 2/21/2012 3:32 PM, Mike Swingler wrote:
>> Would it be feasible to overload ARCH_DATA_MODEL to take a string like
>> "32+64", "32/64", or "Universal" (even though that's an ambiguous
>> misnomer)?
>>
>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 3:31 PM, Phil Race wrote:
>>
>>> 'ARCH_DATA_MODEL' has historically been used to select a build as 32
>>> or 64 bit.
>>> So 'ARCH_DATA_MODEL=32' ought to be able to select a 32 bit only
>>> build without
>>> too many build changes. Making that support 32+64 as well may be
>>> appropriate for OS X builds.
>>>
>>> -phil.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/21/2012 3:19 PM, Mike Swingler wrote:
>>>> Awesome, thanks much James.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a pre-existing flag or naming convention for
>>>> architecture-related build flags? Obviously we want to align with
>>>> existing precedent, and get the HotSpot and JDK sides to use the
>>>> same flag. :-)
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 2:58 PM, James Melvin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes. I can file a bug and look into this, Mike.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/21/12 5:55 PM, Mike Swingler wrote:
>>>>>> On Feb 21, 2012, at 2:45 PM, James Melvin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One caveat...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the JVM, we've preserved 32/64-bit universal builds.
>>>>>>> Currently, the
>>>>>>> JVM universal build only includes 64-bit support. Additionally
>>>>>>> including
>>>>>>> 32-bit requires 3 Makefile uncomments. However, there may likely be
>>>>>>> additional work on the JDK side to fully support the same.
>>>>>> That's good to know, but that should really be keyed off of a
>>>>>> build flag (which can default to 64-bit only). Should we file a CR
>>>>>> through the Oracle bug reporter to get the process started to
>>>>>> change this for HotSpot?
>>>> Is there someone who can help restore the 32/64-bit build-ability
>>>> for the JDK side, or at least direct us as to where we can start
>>>> filing a CR?
>> Curious,
>> Mike Swingler
>> Apple Inc.
>>
>