Future jdk9u updates & 9-critical-request
martijnverburg at gmail.com
Fri Feb 9 04:27:51 UTC 2018
The Adopt build farm is now also in a place where failures across all
platforms will get reported (within 30-60 mins of a push to a repo).
We’re still shy of regularly passing JCKs, but once we cross that milestone
then I’ll start a serious discussion on how we can best feed failures etc
back into OpenJDK mailing lists.
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 at 06:40, Andrew Hughes <gnu.andrew at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 8 February 2018 at 10:26, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 07/02/18 16:33, dalibor topic wrote:
> >> In short, someone is likely always going to be able to claim that a
> >> given release is broken for them in one way or another.
> > This shouldn't happen if a proper release process is followed.
> > This wasn't a minor problem: two targets didn't even run.
> I'm not a HotSpot developer, and certainly not an AArch64 expert,
> but it was pretty obvious to me from a casual inspection of the
> problem changeset that support for these targets was absent.
> It's also not the first time a target has been broken by a CPU,
> though it is the first time for AArch64 being part of an upstream
> There was a changeset that fixed this for the PPC targets, which
> aren't handled by Oracle, as far as I'm aware. So whatever
> process was used there needs to be expanded to cover other
> ports. Hopefully the vulnerability group will resolve this.
> Andrew :)
> Senior Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
> Web Site: http://fuseyism.com
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/gnu_andrew_java
> PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
> Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
Cheers, Martijn (Sent from Gmail Mobile)
More information about the jdk-updates-dev