<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:21, Andrew John Hughes <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gnu_andrew@member.fsf.org">gnu_andrew@member.fsf.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
2009/7/7 Lillian Angel <<a href="mailto:langel@redhat.com">langel@redhat.com</a>>:<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">> <a href="mailto:jon.vanalten@redhat.com">jon.vanalten@redhat.com</a> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> The attached patch corrects a minor issue noted in<br>
>> <a href="http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=289" target="_blank">http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=289</a><br>
>><br>
>> Include statements for the .c files affected are missing, resulting in<br>
>> compiler warnings. While this wasn't affecting the build or correct<br>
>> performance, it is good practice to include headers where appropriate. This<br>
>> patch, adapted from that provided by the original bug reporter above, adds<br>
>> the include statements.<br>
>><br>
>> Comments welcome.<br>
><br>
><br>
> As per Andrew Hughes comments in the bug, I would like to see this filed<br>
> upstream to Sun. I have CC'ed Matthew Flaschen.<br>
><br>
> For now, it is fine to commit.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Cheers,<br>
> Lillian<br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div>I'd much prefer we didn't commit this to IcedTea, as it is just<br>
another patch we have to manage and maintain. The arguments Jon makes<br>
for including this (it doesn't affect performance or the build) can<br>
equally be used as very good reasons for not including it in IcedTea.<br>
The majority of the developers on this list, who have been hacking on<br>
IcedTea for a while, will be aware of how much of a pain it is to have<br>
to test the build with different patches applied and to have to<br>
recreate them when a new build drop appears upstream. The current aim<br>
(at least of those at Red Hat) is to try and reduce this burden by<br>
getting the majority of patches upstream.<br>
<br>
Jon, as you're still new to the project, you're probably unaware of a<br>
lot of this pain so you'll have to take what we say on trust for now<br>
:) Believe me, I think your efforts would be better spent applying<br>
this to the appropriate JDK7 tree and creating a webrev for it. I<br>
can't see an appropriate tree, but presumably those on the net-dev<br>
mailing list can provide appropriate hints.<br>
</blockquote><div><br>The tl forest is the right tree. <br>You can use me ("martin") as a "reviewer" when pushing this upstream.<br><br>Martin<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
Lillian: there already is a bug,<br>
<a href="http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6562614" target="_blank">http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=6562614</a> (referenced in our<br>
IcedTea bug) so it should be a simple matter of just getting the patch<br>
approved (the bug has been) and someone pushing it.<br>
<br>
BTW, I'm aware I said 'I'd commit this' on the bug, but take the fact<br>
that I didn't as a reconsideration on my part... ;)<br>
--<br>
Andrew :-)<br>
<br>
Free Java Software Engineer<br>
Red Hat, Inc. (<a href="http://www.redhat.com" target="_blank">http://www.redhat.com</a>)<br>
<br>
Support Free Java!<br>
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK<br>
<a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath" target="_blank">http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath</a><br>
<a href="http://openjdk.java.net" target="_blank">http://openjdk.java.net</a><br>
<br>
PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (<a href="http://subkeys.pgp.net" target="_blank">http://subkeys.pgp.net</a>)<br>
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8<br>
</blockquote></div><br>