public inbox for java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Hughes <gnu.andrew@redhat.com>
To: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Cc: Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com>, Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com>,
	       Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com>,
	Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
	       gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, java-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, libjava/classpath]: Fix overriding recipe for target 'gjdoc' build warning
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 17:39:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1175880567.13414158.1440092391196.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D60FBF.4090302@redhat.com>

----- Original Message -----
> On 08/20/2015 10:03 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> On 08/20/2015 09:27 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >>> On 08/20/2015 03:57 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> On 20/08/15 09:24, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>>>>> On 08/20/2015 06:36 AM, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>>>> Andrew> No, it isn't. It's still a necessity for initial
> >>>>>>> bootstrapping
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> Andrew> OpenJDK/IcedTea.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Andrew Haley said the opposite here:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00537.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> if you need bootstrapping OpenJDK 6 or OpenJDK 7, then having gcj
> >>>>>> available for the target platform is required. Starting with OpenJDK
> >>>>>> 8 you should be able to cross build OpenJDK 8 with an OpenJDK 8
> >>>>>> available on the cross platform.  It might be possible to cross
> >>>>>> build older OpenJDK versions, but this usually is painful.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sure, but we don't need GCJ going forward.  I don't think that there
> >>>>> are any new platforms to which OpenJDK has not been ported which will
> >>>>> require GCJ to bootstrap.  And even if there are, anybody who needs to
> >>>>> do that can (and, indeed, should) use an earlier version of GCJ.  It's
> >>>>> not going to go away; it will always be in the GCC repos.  And because
> >>>>> newer versions of GCC may break GCJ (and maybe OpenJDK) it makes more
> >>>>> sense to use an old GCC/GCJ for the bootstrapping of an old OpenJDK.
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't see how we don't at present. How else do you solve the
> >>>> chicken-and-egg situation of needing a JDK to build a JDK? I don't
> >>>> see crossing your fingers and hoping there's a binary around
> >>>> somewhere as a very sustainable system.
> >>>
> >>> That's what we do with GCC, binutils, etc: we bootstrap.
> >> Right.  So the question is there some reason why OpenJDK can't be used
> >> to bootstrap itself?  Ie, is there a fundamental reason why Andrew needs
> >> to drop back down to GCJ and start the bootstrapping process from scratch.
> >>
> >> ISTM that ideally the previous version of OpenJDK would be used to
> >> bootstrap the new version of OpenJDK.
> >>
> >> Which leaves the question of how to deal with new platforms, but it
> >> sounds like there's a cross-compilation process starting with OpenJDK 8
> >> which ought to solve that problem.
> >>
> >
> > The issue is that we're still supporting a version of OpenJDK/IcedTea where
> > there is no previous version (6). Once that goes, gcj could go too. This
> > is still just a little too soon.
> But surely OpenJDK6 can build OpenJDK6, right?  I don't see you're
> fundamentally getting anything from always starting with a GCJ bootstrap.
> 

I'm talking about when you don't already have OpenJDK 6.

> >
> > That's where it comes unstuck. How do you get a JDK built when there are
> > no JDK binaries for your architecture?
> Cross compilation, just like folks do for Ada.
> 

Which still needs a JDK somewhere and, as Matthias mentioned, the build
system on older versions of OpenJDK (the ones were talking about) doesn't
really support cross-compilation. I had to hack around just to get x86 on
x86_64 to work.

> 
> >>
> >
> > I'm not against this long-term, just not immediately. Deprecating it now
> > and removing it in the next release cycle (7?) would probably be enough,
> > but we need a little more time to wind down dependencies. I don't see us
> > needing it in a GCC released in 2017.
> I was of the opinion that we should remove it from the default languages
> to be built.  Others wanted to be more aggressive :-)

I actually thought that change would have happened a long long time ago ;)

I'm actually for the aggressive approach, just on a longer time scale, as
I'll need time to transition IcedTea away from gcj.

> 
> jeff
> 

-- 
Andrew :)

Senior Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

PGP Key: ed25519/35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04  C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222

PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F  8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-20 17:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-07 11:22 Uros Bizjak
2015-08-11 18:03 ` Uros Bizjak
2015-08-11 18:54   ` Jeff Law
2015-08-11 19:24     ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-11 19:34       ` Jeff Law
2015-08-12  2:48     ` Tom Tromey
2015-08-12 14:44       ` Jeff Law
2015-08-12 14:57         ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-12 16:23           ` Ian Lance Taylor
2015-08-12 16:21         ` Tom Tromey
2015-08-12 16:24           ` Ian Lance Taylor
2015-08-12 16:47             ` Jeff Law
2015-08-12 16:59               ` Ian Lance Taylor
2015-08-13 10:00               ` Richard Biener
2015-08-13 21:31                 ` Jeff Law
2015-08-14  7:44                   ` Richard Biener
2015-08-14  9:24                     ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-20  2:35       ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20  4:37         ` Tom Tromey
2015-08-20  8:24           ` Matthias Klose
2015-08-20  8:32             ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-20 14:57               ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20 15:27                 ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-20 15:47                   ` Jeff Law
2015-08-20 16:03                     ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20 16:08                       ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-20 16:26                         ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20 16:38                         ` Richard Biener
2015-08-20 16:39                           ` Andrew Haley
2015-08-20 17:35                       ` Jeff Law
2015-08-20 17:39                         ` Andrew Hughes [this message]
2015-08-20 15:52                   ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20 16:34                     ` Richard Biener
2015-08-20 16:59                       ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20 17:35                         ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20 18:05                           ` Richard Biener
2015-08-20 21:06                             ` Joseph Myers
2015-08-20 22:32                             ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-24 16:39                               ` Jeff Law
2015-08-20 14:58           ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20  2:48   ` Andrew Hughes
2015-08-20  6:20     ` Uros Bizjak

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1175880567.13414158.1440092391196.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
    --to=gnu.andrew@redhat.com \
    --cc=aph@redhat.com \
    --cc=doko@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=java-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=law@redhat.com \
    --cc=tom@tromey.com \
    --cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).