From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Mar 12 16:50:26 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A971106566B;
	Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:50:26 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: Volodymyr Kostyrko <c.kworr@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:50:12 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <201203080750.q287oEA5033004@freefall.freebsd.org>
	<201203081309.55633.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4F5E15A2.204@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F5E15A2.204@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201203121250.14548.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/162991: java/openjdk6 fails to build
X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD <freebsd-java.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java>,
	<mailto:freebsd-java-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-java>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-java@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-java-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java>,
	<mailto:freebsd-java-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 16:50:26 -0000

On Monday 12 March 2012 11:26 am, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> > On Thursday 08 March 2012 02:50 am, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> >>   Ok, I found time to investigate it.
> >>
> >>   Everything is about arch guessing. java/openjdk7 substitutes
> >> amd64 for x86_64 while java/openjdk6 doesn't. I just added
> >> missing bits from correspondent java/openjdk7 patch.
> >>
> >>   Redports build:
> >> https://redports.org/buildarchive/20120307160255-45601
> >>
> >>   Patch attached.
> >
> > Sorry but it doesn't make any sense.  I guess you are patching
> > this:
> >
> > ...
> > # Platform settings specific to BSD
> > ifeq ($(PLATFORM), bsd)
> >    OS_VERSION := $(shell uname -r)
> >    # Arch and OS name/version
> >    mach := $(shell uname -m)
> >    archExpr = case "$(mach)" in \
> >                  i[3-9]86) \
> >                      echo i586 \
> >                      ;; \
> >                  *) \
> >                      echo $(mach) \
> >                      ;; \
> >        esac
> >    ARCH        := $(shell $(archExpr) )
> >    ARCH_FAMILY := $(ARCH)
> > ...
> >
> > Unless "UNAME_m" environment variable is set, there is no way
> > that this patch does anything at all.
> >
> > % uname -r
> > 10.0-CURRENT
> > % uname -m
> > amd64
> > % env UNAME_m=x86_64 uname -m
> > x86_64
> >
> > I believe OpenJDK7 added it because some BSDs (e.g.,
> > DragonFlyBSD) return x86_64 for "uname -m".
>
> So why it ends up in our port and not in DragonFlyBSD's pkgsrc?

OpenJDK7 patchset is shared with other BSDs:

https://wikis.oracle.com/display/OpenJDK/BSDPort

OpenJDK6 patchset was based on early OpenJDK7 patchsets and it may or 
may not build on other platforms.  I am 99% sure it won't build on 
DragonFlyBSD/x86-64, BTW.

> > BTW, does "make DISABLE_MAKE_JOBS=yes" make any difference?
>
> Actually after successful build I can't reproduce this issue
> anymore. I seem to miss some bits of data so I'll try to retest in
> clean environment.

These parallel build problems are very hard to reproduce.  Actually, I 
was never able to reproduce it myself.

Jung-uk Kim