Let jvmtiGen exit with a non-zero exit code upon failure

[Staffan Larsen]

Carsten,

This looks good with a few comments:

1) If you make the “verbose” variable into a static field, you can avoid the final-copying.
2) nit: Line 216: put "System.exit(1);” on it’s own line

Oh, and create a bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net

Thanks,
/Staffan

> On 29 okt. 2015, at 14:54, Daniel D. Daugherty <daniel.daugherty at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> JVM/TI belongs to the Serviceability team so adding serviceability-dev at ...
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/28/15 8:45 PM, Carsten Varming wrote:
>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cvarming/jvmtiGen/
>> bug: ?
>> 
>> jvmtiGen is used to process a number of xml and xslt files in OpenJDK.
>> Currently jvmtiGen exits with exit code 0 regardless of its success. This
>> causes make to often consider a target finished when in fact the target
>> failed. It also leads to funny error checking after the execution of
>> jvmtiGen. For instance, in many trace.make files[*] a test for the
>> existence of the output file is carried out after the completion of
>> jvmtiGen. In a clean working repository that test is equivalent to jvmtiGen
>> exiting with a proper exit failure code on failure, but in a dirty working
>> repository the target file might just be pre-existing. This causes
>> unnecessary pain when working with files processed by jvmtiGen.
>> 
>> In this change I chose to exit with exit code 1 whenever a failure is
>> detected, be it a dtd validation failure, an IO failure, or something else
>> entirely. This halts the building of OpenJDK on failures and ultimately
>> makes development easier. I also added a verbose option such that warnings
>> from the xml parser and dtd checker can be printed on stderr if desired.
>> Finally, I changed all the error message printing to stderr. :-)
>> 
>> Let me know what you think.
>> 
>> BTW. This is the first time I tried the webrev system, so hopefully it all
>> looks good. I havn't figured out how to create a bug yet, whence the
>> question mark.
>> 
>> I wasn't sure if hotspot-runtime-dev is the right email alias. Please let
>> me know if there is a more appropriate alias for this email.
>> 
>> [*] Why are so many of the non-shared makefiles almost identical?
>