Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.java > #9964 > unrolled thread

Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.java

Contents

  Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target Chris West <solo-debian@goeswhere.com> - 2017-08-31 14:50 +0200
    Re: Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2017-08-31 23:00 +0200
      Re: Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target Chris West <solo-debianbugs@goeswhere.com> - 2017-09-01 22:50 +0200

#9964 — Java9: 90 broken by -source/-target

The Java 9 games continue!

There are around 90 packages which fail today, but which will succeed
if the -source and -target flags are fixed.

Here are the build logs / package list:
https://rbuild.fau.xxx/2017-08-30/regress/

This is after the current round of ant and Maven changes. There's not a
super strong correlation in the results. Some will be fixed by asking
ant to force the javadoc source option to 1.6, like the javac option.
e.g. https://rbuild.fau.xxx/2017-08-30/regress/opticalraytracer.log


I did this test with this minimal patch:
https://github.com/FauxFaux/debjdk9/blob/6298e520cb315d93d03872aa8e70b7b964f5e1eb/jdk/allow-old-source-versions.diff

The System.err logging is lost in most cases, unfortunately; I suspect
build systems typically drop it, or javac is being run as part of some
abnormal ant build, or...

We could... fiddle the version iff we're running inside
dpkg-buildpackage, using environment detection again? Pretty ew. Not
sure it would work for Ubuntu.



Are we going to fix these all by hand? i.e. shall I raise 90 bugs,
and then start changing packages? Or are we going to fix this in the
compiler? Or does someone have an ant/environent suggestion?

Cheers.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#9970

Le 31/08/2017 à 14:20, Chris West a écrit :

> Are we going to fix these all by hand? i.e. shall I raise 90 bugs,
> and then start changing packages? Or are we going to fix this in the
> compiler? Or does someone have an ant/environent suggestion?

I don't think we should touch the compiler, or the peanut gallery will
scream in horror and complain that Debian's OpenJDK isn't Java. Let's
fix Ant first and see what's left. If a package calls javac or javadoc
directly (like junit [1]) a bug can be raised right now.

Emmanuel Bourg

[1] https://sources.debian.net/src/junit/3.8.2-8/debian/rules/#L24

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9975

 Aug 31, 2017 le 06:42:28PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg êcrit:
> Le 31/08/2017 à 14:20, Chris West a écrit :
> 
> I don't think we should touch the compiler, or the peanut gallery will
> scream in horror and complain that Debian's OpenJDK isn't Java. Let's
> fix Ant first and see what's left.

I think all the remaining problems hit either:
 * -Dant.build.javac.source: https://bugs.debian.org/873969 , or
 * <javadoc source="1.[345]: https://bugs.debian.org/873977

But, who knows what we'll find with those fixed.

> If a package calls javac or javadoc > directly (like junit [1]) a bug
> can be raised right now.

Done. It was only about 30.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.java

csiph-web