FWIW, I have been following the bsd-port and icedtea lists for awhile. I just tried compiling Icedtea on the Mac PPC with icedtea6 and icedtea (7).
I know there is no direct bsd support for icedtea6 but using a modified Apple jdk5 for a bootstrap I am able to completely finish all the patching and creation of the jdk6/7 bootstraps and then the make fails as follows which is pretty much expected. I think this is actually pretty good news as there is no jdk6 for Darwin/PPC. An upstream bsd-port for jdk6 would work out of the box for icedtea6 with the proper MacOSX setup.
jdk/make/common/shared/Defs.gmk:157: "WARNING: Value of ARCH cannot be empty, will use ''"
jdk/make/common/shared/Defs.gmk:157: "WARNING: Value of ARCH_DATA_MODEL cannot be empty, will use ''"
jdk/make/common/shared/Defs.gmk:157: "WARNING: Value of PLATFORM cannot be empty, will use ''"
jdk/make/common/shared/Defs.gmk:330: jdk/make/common/shared/Defs-.gmk: No such file or directory
jdk/make/common/shared/Compiler.gmk:46: jdk/make/common/shared/Compiler-.gmk: No such file or directory
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `jdk/make/common/shared/Compiler-.gmk'. Stop.
In icedtea (7) the build fails on the first patch. This is not completely fair as there has been a lot of changes lately so there could be a few loose ends and just the other day it made it through many patches before stopping. As mentioned before fixing all the icedtea patches is a pretty big chore especially for the uninitiated like myself.
Checking patches/icedtea-version.patch
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|--- openjdk/jdk/src/share/classes/sun/misc/Version.java.template~1~ 2008-11-25 01:04:53.000000000 -0800
|+++ openjdk/jdk/src/share/classes/sun/misc/Version.java.template 2009-02-20 09:03:25.000000000 -0800
--------------------------
No file to patch. Skipping patch.
2 out of 2 hunks ignored
ERROR patch patches/icedtea-version.patch FAILED!
WARNING make clean-patch before retrying a fix
make: *** [stamps/patch.stamp] Error 2
I really appreciate all the work done here to make the OpenJDK more accessible, but wish I could be more help.
Thanks,
Eric
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Greg Lewis
<glewis@...> wrote:
G'day Andrew,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 02:12:17AM +0000, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> 2009/11/10 Kurt Miller <
kurt@...>:
> > It would be fantastic if Sun would host a mercurial repository
> > for OpenJDK6 (i.e. bsd-port6 or the like). Is there a chance that
> > Sun could set that up for us? The lack of a central repository is
> > one of the reasons I haven't worked on OpenBSD support for OpenJDK.
>
> Rather than creating a new separate tree, how about we just try and
> get the necessary changes into OpenJDK6 directly?
> Then that would give a good base to move forward on getting support in 7 too.
getting BSD support (ultimately) into the current development tree so
we have less heavy lifting to do going forward?
That's what I'd really like to come out of the discussion here. I think
we've been pretty good at keeping the bsd-port tree of OpenJDK7 up to date
(its currently at b75 and I'll start moving it to b76 once that tag goes
down) but we still don't seem to be any closer to getting the changes into
the main source tree than we were when we started. How do we move forward
with that? Is Sun's preferred method for us to go through OpenJDK6? That
certainly doesn't seem to have been the case for Zero, which is probably
of a similar order of disruption, but I'm open to it for the BSD patches if
there is a solid reason for doing it that way.
Certainly its starting to get a little demotivating to me personally and
I can't help but wonder if other team members don't feel the same.
Andrew, this isn't aimed at you at all, btw, you're just kinda touching
on a bit of a sore spot :).
Dalibor, who needs to be involved in such a discussion and what can I do
to help move it forward?
