Bug#567992: OpenJDK7 on Debian GNU/kFreeBSD
drazzib at drazzib.com
Tue Jun 28 11:52:39 PDT 2011
Thanks for your feedback.
Le mardi 28 juin 2011 02:11:12, Andrew John Hughes a écrit :
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:27:44PM +0200, Damien Raude-Morvan wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'm currently trying to port OpenJDK7 (ie. icedtea)
> These aren't the same thing. IcedTea wraps and expands OpenJDK7.
Yes, I know that's not the same thing, sorry for abusing of "id est"
abbreviation. BTW, since I've CC people not used to "openjdk" ecosystem, I
prefer to talk about openjdk than icedtea, is this a problem ?
> > My current WiP patch  consist mostly in :
> > - Alter build system to consider GNU/kFreeBSD like mostly linux (ie. add
> > many ifdef __GLIBC__)
> > - Steal BSD network stack impl for bsd-port hg repository
> > - Use sysctl call instead of sysinfo()
> > - Disable build of alsa and sctp
> I'd be very surprised if you don't need more of the bsd work than just the
> network stack. What exactly have you ported across?
Right now, main backports from bsd-port branch are :
- jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c (small changes in structs
- jdk/src/solaris/native/sun/nio/ch/FileChannelImpl.c (sendfile from kfreebsd)
- hotspot/src/os/linux/vm/attachListener_linux.cpp (LOCAL_PEERCRED instead of
> > I'm able to compile a stage1 jdk (openjdk-boot) but first invocation of
> > this
> > jdk (with ZeroVM of course) just fail badly :
> Why ZeroVM? You mention above that the port is to x86 and x86_64, both of
> which have full HotSpot ports with a JIT.
Because I thought (naively ?) that since Zero doesn't use any
assembly/linux/gcc specific hacks it should be easier to port to GNU/kFreeBSD
as a first step.
> > I've attached hs_err_pid96754.log and put a GDB output online 
> > => Did someone have a clue about this issue ? Or maybe a process to track
> > down this segv signal ?
> > PS: Please keep debian-bsd at l.d.o and 567992 at b.d.o in CC.
> No but given OpenJDK7 doesn't support *BSD, I'm not too surprised this
> doesn't work, especially when you're also throwing zero into the mix. Why
> not just build with the bsd-port? There's an option to do that, though
> it's not really maintained as I don't know of anyone running IcedTea on
Could you explain a little bit more why do you think zerovm can add
complexity/errors to my porting work ? You think that it would be simplier to
work on porting to Hotspot ?
Right now, building bsd-port give a lot more errors since :
- it expect a *BSD userland (whereas GNU/kFreeBSD has **GNU tools**)
- it expect a *BSD libc (various diff from **GNU glibc**)
- large part of source code is a copy/paste from linux directories (lots of
duplicated code) so patches from icedtea are not applied...
But maybe you're right, I'll try the other way around : I'll try to adapt bsd-
port to GNU/kFreeBSD.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/zero-dev/attachments/20110628/90ddafd7/attachment.bin
More information about the zero-dev