[PATCH] Update RPATH to make loading libjawt possible (original) (raw)

Andrew Hughes ahughes at redhat.com
Tue Aug 14 09:17:45 UTC 2012

----- Original Message -----

I have pointed out some changes below, but there is a serious problem. You are checking for the system arch using uname but the java architecture may not be the same.

For example we run 32-bit jdk on a 64bit system, this will cause test failures since we will be using the wrong path names. You can use the following to determine the java arch. % java -XshowSettings:props -version 2>&1 | grep os.arch

This doesn't work (at least for me) unless the '-version' is removed.

I also note that this seems to only be present in 7 and later (i.e. not 6), not that this will matter in this case.

other diffs follow..... > @@ -22,16 +22,17 @@ # questions. > # @test runtest.sh -# @bug 9999999 +# @bug 7190813 # @summary Native code linked against libjawt.so should be sufficent for libjawt.so to be found # @run shell runtest.sh > -if [ "${TESTSRC}" = "" ] -then TESTSRC=. +set -x + +if [ "${TESTSRC}" = "" ]; then + TESTSRC=. fi > -if [ "${TESTJAVA}" = "" ] -then +if [ "${TESTJAVA}" = "" ]; then PARENT=dirname \which java`` TESTJAVA=dirname ${PARENT} echo "TESTJAVA not set, selecting " ${TESTJAVA} @@ -46,14 +47,10 @@ PS=":" FS="/" ;; - SunOS | Windows* ) - echo "Test passed; only valid for Linux" + * ) + echo "Warning: test passes vacuously for non linux systems" exit 0; ;; - * ) - echo "Unrecognized system!" - exit 1; - ;; esac > # Get ARCH specifics @@ -71,13 +68,13 @@ > gcc -v > /dev/null 2>&1 if [ "$?" != 0 ] ; then - echo "No compiler found" - exit 1 + echo "Warning: No gcc compiler found, test passes vacuously" + exit 0 fi > -JAVAC=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javac -JAVAH=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javah -JAVA=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}java +JAVAC=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javac +JAVAH=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javah +JAVA=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}java > $JAVAC -d . TESTSRC{TESTSRC}TESTSRC{FS}TestJawt.java || exit 1 $JAVAH TestJawt || exit 1 >> Thanks Kumar > > On 08/13/2012 10:39 AM, Anthony Petrov wrote: >> The test looks great, and I like that it doesn't depend on the >> JAWT >> machinery, but tests the actual problematic RPATH entry only. > I generally go for tests that verify behaviour (that jawt-linked > programs are working) rather than implementation details (which > changed, > for example, when we switched from LDLIBRARYPATH to RPATHS). > >> +1 from me. > Yes, good to have something that guards us from changing something > unintentionally. Looks fine to me too. > > Cheers, > Omair >

Andrew :)

Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07

More information about the build-dev mailing list