Hi Andrew, Thanks for your feedback. Le mardi 28 juin 2011 02:11:12, Andrew John Hughes a écrit : > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:27:44PM +0200, Damien Raude-Morvan wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm currently trying to port OpenJDK7 (ie. icedtea) > > These aren't the same thing. IcedTea wraps and expands OpenJDK7. Yes, I know that's not the same thing, sorry for abusing of "id est" abbreviation. BTW, since I've CC people not used to "openjdk" ecosystem, I prefer to talk about openjdk than icedtea, is this a problem ? > > My current WiP patch  consist mostly in : > > - Alter build system to consider GNU/kFreeBSD like mostly linux (ie. add > > many ifdef __GLIBC__) > > > > - Steal BSD network stack impl for bsd-port hg repository > > - Use sysctl call instead of sysinfo() > > - Disable build of alsa and sctp > > I'd be very surprised if you don't need more of the bsd work than just the > network stack. What exactly have you ported across? Right now, main backports from bsd-port branch are : - jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c (small changes in structs from kernel) - jdk/src/solaris/native/sun/nio/ch/FileChannelImpl.c (sendfile from kfreebsd) - hotspot/src/os/linux/vm/attachListener_linux.cpp (LOCAL_PEERCRED instead of SO_PEERCRED) > > I'm able to compile a stage1 jdk (openjdk-boot) but first invocation of > > this > > > jdk (with ZeroVM of course) just fail badly : > Why ZeroVM? You mention above that the port is to x86 and x86_64, both of > which have full HotSpot ports with a JIT. Because I thought (naively ?) that since Zero doesn't use any assembly/linux/gcc specific hacks it should be easier to port to GNU/kFreeBSD as a first step. > > I've attached hs_err_pid96754.log and put a GDB output online  > > > > => Did someone have a clue about this issue ? Or maybe a process to track > > down this segv signal ? > > > > PS: Please keep email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org in CC. > > No but given OpenJDK7 doesn't support *BSD, I'm not too surprised this > doesn't work, especially when you're also throwing zero into the mix. Why > not just build with the bsd-port? There's an option to do that, though > it's not really maintained as I don't know of anyone running IcedTea on > *BSD. Could you explain a little bit more why do you think zerovm can add complexity/errors to my porting work ? You think that it would be simplier to work on porting to Hotspot ? Right now, building bsd-port give a lot more errors since : - it expect a *BSD userland (whereas GNU/kFreeBSD has **GNU tools**) - it expect a *BSD libc (various diff from **GNU glibc**) - large part of source code is a copy/paste from linux directories (lots of duplicated code) so patches from icedtea are not applied... But maybe you're right, I'll try the other way around : I'll try to adapt bsd- port to GNU/kFreeBSD. Cheers, -- Damien
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.