RFR: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] JDK-8215296 do not disable c99 on Solaris (original) (raw)

Baesken, Matthias matthias.baesken at sap.com
Tue Dec 18 08:56:30 UTC 2018

Thanks David, can I add you as a reviewer ?

Unfortunately the jdk/jdk Solaris sparc results are currently so broken (with or without the change) that it is hard to tell what difference it really makes ...

Best regards, Matthias

-----Original Message----- From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> Sent: Dienstag, 18. Dezember 2018 09:45 To: Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baesken at sap.com>; 2d- dev at openjdk.java.net; erik.joelsson at oracle.com; 'build- dev at openjdk.java.net' <build-dev at openjdk.java.net>; awt- dev at openjdk.java.net; 'magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com' <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> Subject: Re: RFR: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] JDK-8215296 do not disable c99 on Solaris

On 18/12/2018 6:02 pm, Baesken, Matthias wrote: > Hi David, thanks for the update on your internal builds . Same is true for our internal builds . > > Regarding C99 with -Xa set : > >>> >>> It's not at all clear to me that C99-isms will be allowed if -Xa is set. >>> > > The C99 features I tested are allowed when -Xa is set (tested with SS12 update 4) - Thanks for the info. Seems okay for now then. David > -Xa is set, without other compile flags : > > bash-4.1$ /compiler/SS12u4-Oct2017/SUNWspro/bin/cc bool.c -Xa -o bool > bash-4.1$ ./bool > b is true. > a: 1 > > -Xa is set together with the old flag forbidding C99 , this leads to a lot of compile errors : > > bash-4.1$ /compiler/SS12u4-Oct2017/SUNWspro/bin/cc bool.c - xc99=%none -Xa -o bool > "bool.c", line 5: undefined symbol: bool > "bool.c", line 5: syntax error before or at: b > "bool.c", line 6: undefined symbol: b > "bool.c", line 9: syntax error before or at: / > "bool.c", line 12: undefined symbol: a > cc: acomp failed for bool.c > > The example program contains bool , C++-style comments and declaration of a after the if-statement. > > bash-4.1$ more bool.c > #include <stdio.h> > #include <stdbool.h> > > int main() { > bool b = true; > if (b) { > printf("b is true.\n"); > } > // C++ style comments > // decl. > int a = 1; > printf("a: %d \n", a); > > return 0; > } > > > Best regards, Matthias > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> >> Sent: Dienstag, 18. Dezember 2018 01:24 >> To: Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baesken at sap.com>; 2d- >> dev at openjdk.java.net; erik.joelsson at oracle.com; 'build- >> dev at openjdk.java.net' <build-dev at openjdk.java.net>; awt- >> dev at openjdk.java.net; 'magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com' >> <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> >> Subject: Re: RFR: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] JDK-8215296 do not disable c99 on >> Solaris >> >> Our internal builds pass okay. >> >> David >> >> On 18/12/2018 8:02 am, David Holmes wrote: >>> Hi Matthias, >>> >>> On 17/12/2018 11:12 pm, Baesken, Matthias wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello,  please review >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8215296.0/ >>>> >>>> in my change just -xc99=%none  is removed, so we do not forbid c99 >>>> coding. >>>> >>>> The -Xa compile flag is kept,  no special additional settings are >>>> needed to compile png/awt . >>> >>> It's not at all clear to me that C99-isms will be allowed if -Xa is set. >>> >>> I don't think jdk-submit tests Solaris. I'm putting this through our >>> internal builds. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> David >>> >

More information about the build-dev mailing list