Review Request JDK-8175819: OS name and arch in JMOD files should match the values as in the bundle name

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On 2017-04-04 10:04, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>
> On 2017-04-03 23:50, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:39 PM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
>>>
>>> 2017/4/3 13:35:30 -0700, simon at cjnash.com:
>>>> On 03/04/2017 21:15, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>> 2017/4/3 11:41:03 -0700, mandy.chung at oracle.com:
>>>>>> Webrev:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8175819/webrev.00/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This shows the old and new value of OS_NAME/OS_ARCH properties
>>>>>> in the `release` file:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            JDK 8               JDK 9
>>>>>>            -----               -----
>>>>>> OS_NAME     Linux               linux
>>>>>>            SunOS               solaris
>>>>>>            Darwin              osx
>>>>>>            Windows             windows
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OS_ARCH     i386,x86            x86
>>>>>>            i586,amd64,x86_64   x64
>>>>>>            sparcv9             sparcv9
>>>>>>            arm                 arm32
>>>>>>            aarch64             arm64
>>>> I am not sure why we would change to osx for Mac when the Mac 
>>>> developers
>>>> have recently dropped the Mac OS X terminology and changed it to 
>>>> macOS.
>>> Agreed -- we should change OS_NAME from "Darwin" to "macos”.
>> OK.  Should the bundle names be updated to reflect this change?
>> In any case, it is a separate issue.
>>
>>             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

Having though this over real hard, I'd realized I need to make a plea 
for sanity and consistency. I thought I should lay low in this 
discussion, but I can't. Choosing "amd64" as the name for the 64-bit x86 
platform is really, really unfortunate and a step backwards in our 
effort to standardize the name of this platform.

We have continuously worked on trying to get "x64" the all-around 
standard name for this platform. Since we dropped the path "lib/amd64", 
I believe more or less the only place left that still has "amd64" is 
os.arch, which is not easy to change due to legacy reasons (although I'd 
really like to see that changed too, considering that it already is 
different on different operating systems...)

I'd really hate for us to suddenly start introducing changes that once 
again divert us away. :-( It's hard enough as it is with all this 
converting of names. Let us not add yet another odd place!

/Magnus

> 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.
>
> /Magnus
>
>>
>> Mandy
>>
>