Zlib level in JDK7
philip.race at oracle.com
Tue Feb 22 17:26:44 UTC 2011
On 2/20/2011 9:39 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 15 February 2011 20:23, Phil Race<philip.race at oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 2/15/2011 6:07 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> Yes, IcedTea uses system libraries for everything bar LCMS, where
>>> local changes in OpenJDK mean we are still forced to use the in-tree
>>> version. There hasn't been any success upstreaming these changes,
>>> though I haven't looked at LCMS 2.x.
>> LittleCMS 1.x didn't provide the support necessary to pass JCK. So we
>> talked to
>> the LittleCMS maintainer and he added the necessary APIs in 2.0
>> JDK 7 has had LittleCMS 2.0 for almost 6 months now and that is included
>> without any code
>> modifications, so I think it should now be possible to use a system
>> library, although
>> we didn't do the work to actually enable that, so its built into a JDK
>> library which
>> has the littlecms code and the glue code. We need to provide the ability
>> to separate these.
>> When we pushed LCMS 2.0, I asked for a bug to be filed to remember to do
>> this work
>> but I can't find it in the database. I'll ask for that to be filed if it
>> wasn't already.
>> NB It didn't seem super-urgent since we pulled in LCMS 2.0 relatively soon
>> after its release
>> we thought shipping distros weren't likely to have the library upgrade
>> anyway, but that's
>> probably changing.
> Hi Phil,
> Thanks for making me aware of this. I briefly glanced at some for the
> release notes for LCMS 2 when it was released, and saw something that
> may support the missing functionality, but never had chance to look in
> detail. I've also not had chance to look at OpenJDK 7 recently, so
> it's great to hear that support has already gone in. Do you have any
> idea as to whether this would be safe to backport to OpenJDK 6? I
> presume it doesn't alter any public API.
It ought to be OK. If someone else wants to take on the work that is :-)
> I've not seen any use of OpenJDK 7 by distros as yet. We've managed
> with the other libraries without in-tree support by using local
> patching. There's a big libraries patch in IcedTea that would be nice
> to integrate but it would need considerable work to do optional system
> linking rather than the current brute force of deleting the in-tree
> version and always linking. There's also no TCK for 7 yet, which is I
> believe what caught many of the issues with missing LCMS support
I don't know how distros would want to present/package the 7 EA builds
so I'm not
too surprised they aren't common.
We believe LCMS 2.0 should pass JCK, but I don't know if a full JCK run
has been performed against a fully open 7 build since it went in.
A 6-open backport would find any problems there.
> I did a quick survey of distro support for LCMS 2. It's in Gentoo
> (which is what made me aware of it), but Ubuntu, Debian and Fedora all
> seem to still be on the 1.x series. So it doesn't seem to be changing
> yet. Maybe OpenJDK could be the kick they need to support it? ;-)
More information about the core-libs-dev