[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-2d-dev
Subject:    Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR(L) - 2nd round: 8024854: Basic changes and files to build the class library
From:       Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty () oracle ! com>
Date:       2013-12-02 18:23:45
Message-ID: B3E2151A-9CAA-41AE-924E-DEB1B1A643C8 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


On 26 Nov 2013, at 18:08, Iris Clark wrote:

> > So overall it looks good to me and should be pushed to the staging > forest once \
> > you hear from others that commented previously.
> 
> I think that means Chris Hegarty, Michael McMahon, and Sergey Bylokhov.  Alan, \
> please correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm ok with these changes going into the staging forest as are.

-Chris.

> 
> Thanks,
> iris
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Bateman 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 9:03 AM
> To: Volker Simonis
> Cc: Vladimir Kozlov; 2d-dev@openjdk.java.net; serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net; \
> security-dev; ppc-aix-port-dev@openjdk.java.net; awt-dev@openjdk.java.net; Java \
>                 Core Libs; net-dev
> Subject: Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR(L) - 2nd round: 8024854: Basic changes and files \
> to build the class library on AIX 
> On 26/11/2013 16:23, Volker Simonis wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > thanks to everybody for the prompt and helpful reviews. Here comes the 
> > final webrev which incorporates all the corrections and suggestions 
> > from the second review round:
> > 
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/8024854.v3/
> > 
> > I've successfully build (and run some smoke tests) with these changes 
> > on Linux (x86_32, x86_64, ppc64), Solaris/sparcv9, Windows/x86_64, 
> > MacOSX and AIX (5.3, 7.1).
> > 
> I've skimmed over the last webrev with focus on:
> 
> NetworkingLibraries.gmk where I see this is now fixed for all platforms.
> 
> net_util.* and the platform specific net_util_md.* where I see you've added \
> platformInit so it's much cleaner. 
> UnixNativeDispatcher.c where the error translation is now removed (and looks fine).
> 
> So overall it looks good to me and should be pushed to the staging forest once you \
> hear from others that commented previously. 
> -Alan


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]