Required Solaris Studio version for jdk9 ?
erik.joelsson at oracle.com
Thu Mar 30 15:46:19 UTC 2017
I can't say for sure that they are always released in sync (but I do
think they are), at least the packages I used had the same versions. I
have also confirmed that the dates reported by our sparc compiler
package are the same as for x86.
On 2017-03-30 17:02, Volker Simonis wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Erik Joelsson
> <erik.joelsson at oracle.com> wrote:
>> Hello Volker,
>> On 2017-03-30 10:33, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>> the current common/doc/building.md  file mentions Studio 12 Update
>>> 4 with several patches as the minimal build requirement for jdk9 on
>>> Solaris. Is this information still up to date and do you plan to use
>>> the mentioned versions for the Java 9 GA build?
>> We have no plans for changing any compiler versions before 9 GA.
>>> Does somebody know how I can find out the exact patch levels of the
>>> installed Studio compiler/backend versions if I'm using a version of
>>> Studio which isn't installed locally but on a network share? I tried
>>> "-V -verbose=version" but it only shows:
>>> $ CC -V -verbose=version
>>> CC: Sun C++ 5.13 SunOS_sparc 2014/10/20
>>> I've also tried the 'version' tool with the same result:
>>> $ version cc
>>> cc: Sun C 5.13 SunOS_sparc 2014/10/20
>>> The version tool recommends using pkginfo/pkg to get the exact version
>>> of the installed studio components, but this obviously doesn't work
>>> for a network installation.
>> I don't think there is a way unfortunately. The package versions listed in
>> the documentation is the version for each package that was the latest
>> available when I happened to install them, when I created our compiler
>> package. It does seem like the date printed is significant however. In our
>> compiler package, cc and CC report this:
>> $ cc -V
>> cc: Sun C 5.13 SunOS_i386 2014/10/20
>> $ CC -V
>> CC: Sun C++ 5.13 SunOS_i386 151846-10 2015/10/30
>> So it would seem our C++ compiler is newer than yours. I do remember there
>> were bugs in the earlier versions of 12.4 C++ which we required fixes for
>> before we could switch, so I think you should probably try to upgrade.
> Hi Erik,
> thanks a lot for your quick answer!
> You've reported the version of the x86 version of the compiler though.
> Can you confirm, that you use the same versions for Sparc (i.e. are
> the two versions always released synchronously)?
>>> Thank you and best regards,
More information about the build-dev