[opensuse-arm] Re: Ответ: Re: java-1_6_0-openjdk xprop build requires

newer
[opensuse-arm] imx51 image

older
[opensuse-arm] ecj-bootstrap build...

Michal Vyskocil

11 Jul 2012 11 Jul '12

13:43

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 09:46:13PM +0200, Dinar Valeev wrote:

...

Hi, It seems Fedora downgraded to hs22 on non standrard architectures. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=java-1.7.0-openjdk.git;a=commit;h= 52082f611bef945585a70f9e08ab181e3761b077

Hallo Dinar, I will preffer to not to touch spec file. @adrian: do you have any hint how we can handle that? I was thinking about making the java-1_7_0-openjdk.zero package, which will be a branch or a link of older revision of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Then arm and powerpc projects will link this package instead of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Do you think if that's reasonable approach? Regards Michal Vyskocil

...

Dinar

...
...
...
Michal Vyskocil 09.07.12 11:51 >>> On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 05:55:58PM +0200, Dinar Valeev wrote: sent SR 127353

I've tried to build 1.7 java using fixed 1.6 but it fails the same way ARM guys has recently. http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-arm/2012-06/msg00120.html

But it's weird. Now arm fails differently and the don't have mentioned patch applied.

Hallo Dinar,

I'm very sorry, but according upstream guys, recent icedtea does not build with zero, so we do not have openjdk7 for those platforms. I'll ask people on opensuse-arm (with you in CC) for a solution.

Regards Michal Vyskocil

Attachments:

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature — 198 bytes)

Show replies by date

Adrian Schröter

11 Jul 11 Jul

13:54

Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012, 15:43:27 schrieb Michal Vyskocil:

...

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 09:46:13PM +0200, Dinar Valeev wrote:

...
Hi, It seems Fedora downgraded to hs22 on non standrard architectures. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=java-1.7.0-openjdk.git;a=commit;h= 52082f611bef945585a70f9e08ab181e3761b077

Hallo Dinar,

I will preffer to not to touch spec file.

@adrian: do you have any hint how we can handle that? I was thinking about making the java-1_7_0-openjdk.zero package, which will be a branch or a link of older revision of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Then arm and powerpc projects will link this package instead of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Do you think if that's reasonable approach?

In general yes, but we should not link it, but put it directly to factory and 12.2 directly. Our goal is to have one source stream. We can use "ExcludeArch" statements that just the right one would build. So it should not be a problem the we have the sources twice. However, as an alternative solution, Dirk had the idea to add some real vm support to 2.2.1 like jam vm. Dunno about the state there. thanks a lot for your help here! adrian

...

Regards Michal Vyskocil

...
Dinar

...
...
...
Michal Vyskocil 09.07.12 11:51 >>> On Sat, Jul 07, 2012 at 05:55:58PM +0200, Dinar Valeev wrote: sent SR 127353

I've tried to build 1.7 java using fixed 1.6 but it fails the same way ARM guys has recently. http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-arm/2012-06/msg00120.html

But it's weird. Now arm fails differently and the don't have mentioned patch applied.

Hallo Dinar,

I'm very sorry, but according upstream guys, recent icedtea does not build with zero, so we do not have openjdk7 for those platforms. I'll ask people on opensuse-arm (with you in CC) for a solution.

Regards Michal Vyskocil

-- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-arm+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-arm+owner@opensuse.org

Michal Vyskocil

12 Jul 12 Jul

07:52

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 03:54:22PM +0200, Adrian Schröter wrote:

...

Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012, 15:43:27 schrieb Michal Vyskocil:

...
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 09:46:13PM +0200, Dinar Valeev wrote:

...
Hi, It seems Fedora downgraded to hs22 on non standrard architectures. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=java-1.7.0-openjdk.git;a=commit;h= 52082f611bef945585a70f9e08ab181e3761b077

Hallo Dinar,

I will preffer to not to touch spec file.

@adrian: do you have any hint how we can handle that? I was thinking about making the java-1_7_0-openjdk.zero package, which will be a branch or a link of older revision of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Then arm and powerpc projects will link this package instead of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Do you think if that's reasonable approach?

In general yes, but we should not link it, but put it directly to factory and 12.2 directly. Our goal is to have one source stream. We can use "ExcludeArch" statements that just the right one would build. So it should not be a problem the we have the sources twice.

OK, I made copypac from revision 15 - updated to 2.1.1 to get all security fixes in and submit with ExclusiveArch: %{arm} ppc ppc64 into Factory. The original package got ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64. see request 127700

...

However, as an alternative solution, Dirk had the idea to add some real vm support to 2.2.1 like jam vm. Dunno about the state there.

Sure, that will be the best one. However it's a medium term goal for me atm, so I'll preffer a little hackish temporary workaround.

...

thanks a lot for your help here!

Thanks for making it clear Michal Vyskocil

Adrian Schröter

08:19

Am Donnerstag, 12. Juli 2012, 09:52:43 schrieb Michal Vyskocil:

...

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 03:54:22PM +0200, Adrian Schröter wrote:

...
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012, 15:43:27 schrieb Michal Vyskocil:

...
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 09:46:13PM +0200, Dinar Valeev wrote:

...
Hi, It seems Fedora downgraded to hs22 on non standrard architectures. http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=java-1.7.0-openjdk.git;a=commit;h= 52082f611bef945585a70f9e08ab181e3761b077

Hallo Dinar,

I will preffer to not to touch spec file.

@adrian: do you have any hint how we can handle that? I was thinking about making the java-1_7_0-openjdk.zero package, which will be a branch or a link of older revision of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Then arm and powerpc projects will link this package instead of java-1_7_0-openjdk. Do you think if that's reasonable approach?

In general yes, but we should not link it, but put it directly to factory and 12.2 directly. Our goal is to have one source stream. We can use "ExcludeArch" statements that just the right one would build. So it should not be a problem the we have the sources twice.

OK,

I made copypac from revision 15 - updated to 2.1.1 to get all security fixes in and submit with ExclusiveArch: %{arm} ppc ppc64 into Factory. The original package got ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} x86_64.

see request 127700

sounds perfect :) I will talk with legal to get it through soon, because they reviewed that basically already ... Thanks again, that helps a lot! adrian -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-arm+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-arm+owner@opensuse.org

4317

Age (days ago)

4318

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

3 comments

2 participants

participants (2)

Adrian Schröter
Michal Vyskocil