Fwd: Official and community supported build platforms for JDK 8 and 9
martijnverburg at gmail.com
Tue Nov 25 10:37:01 UTC 2014
Can you propose that to the build-dev list - unfortunately I don't have
edit access to that wiki.
On 24 November 2014 at 22:52, Mani Sarkar <sadhak001 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris good one! Bring them on, I'm sure Martijn will agree as well.
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Chris Newland <cnewland at chrisnewland.com>
>> Hi Martijn,
>> Looks good. How about a column for whether the OpenJDK tests pass? Maybe a
>> date column or hg version tag so we know what version of the OpenJDK
>> codebase it built against?
>> I'm happy to volunteer reporting build status for Debian (7 & 8) if that's
>> One last question - for me OpenJDK is only useful when it includes
>> OpenJFX. I've got some Debian scripts for building both and installing JFX
>> into the JDK image. Happy to donate those if useful?
>> I saw the OpenJFX 9-dev repo was recently opened. Is part of the Adoption
>> group mission to promote OpenJFX?
>> On Mon, November 24, 2014 20:18, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > Since many of you are first time build enthusiasts - here's a very
>> > link.
>> > Cheers,
>> > Martijn
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> > From: Omair Majid <omajid at redhat.com>
>> > Date: 21 November 2014 at 20:55
>> > Subject: Re: Official and community supported build platforms for JDK 8
>> > and 9
>> > To: Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com>
>> > Cc: jdk8-dev at openjdk.java.net, build-dev <build-dev at openjdk.java.net>,
>> > jdk9-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> > Hi,
>> > Thanks for creating this!
>> > * Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> [2014-11-21
>> >> To help address this, I've created a publicly available wiki page:
>> >> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/Build/Supported+build+platforms
>> > Can you clarify what "Works correctly" means? Does it mean just building
>> > or does it include building and running? For example, OpenJDK 8 probably
>> > fails to build (or at least it used to fail to build) on most Linux
>> > distributions that were using Make 4.0. A patch was needed to fix that,
>> > but when that was fixed, OpenJDK 8 would build and run just fine. In
>> > like this, is it better to say "works correctly" and/or "builds with
>> > workarounds" or something else entirely?
>> > How about adding a column named "last checked" or "last updated" to make
>> > it obvious when building on that platform was last checked?
>> > Thanks,
>> > Omair
>> > --
>> > PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
>> > Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95 0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681
> @theNeomatrix369 <http://twitter.com/theNeomatrix369>* | **Blog
> <http://neomatrix369.wordpress.com>** | *LJC Associate & LJC Advocate
> (@adoptopenjdk & @adoptajsr programs)
> *Meet-a-Project - *MutabilityDetector
> <https://github.com/MutabilityDetector>* | **Bitbucket
> <https://bitbucket.org/neomatrix369>* * | **Github
> <https://github.com/neomatrix369>* * | **LinkedIn
> *Come to Devoxx UK 2015:* http://www.devoxx.co.uk/
> *Don't chase success, rather aim for "Excellence", and success will come
> chasing after you!*
More information about the adoption-discuss