harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "tatyana doubtsova" <tatyanadoubts...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general][M2] Code frozen
Date Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:12:30 GMT
Hello,

I've started testing of
http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/r550333/ on windows x86
with the following workloads from
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/buildtest/branches/2.0:
EGA x 48 hours, reliability, axis, Jetty, struts, functional, stress, eut,
gut, tptp, vtsvm.
SciMark and Dacapo already passed. I'll report results, as they are
available.

Thanks,
Tanya



On 6/25/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/25/07, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2007/6/25, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> > > On 6/25/07, Mark Hindess wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 25 June 2007 at 13:59, "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > On 6/24/07, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We have passed our code freeze date for M2
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Mikhail,
> > > > >
> > > > > Just to be clear - M1 milestone published snapshots include build
> for
> > > > > Windows x86, Linux (libstdc++ v5 and libstdc++ v6) x86 and Windows
> > > > > x86_64.
> > > >
> > > > Do you think it would be possible to produce source snapshots?  The
> > > > Apache release FAQ (at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html )
> says:
> > > >
> > > >  The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
> > > >  releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
> > > >  changes to the software being released. In some cases,
> binary/bytecode
> > > >  packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might
> > > >  not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the
> > > >  source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have
> > > >  the same version number as the source release and may only add
> > > >  binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version
> of
> > > >  the source code release.
> > > >
> > > > Currently binaries are our primary artifact.  I appreciated that it
> may
> > > > be a little late to try to correct this for this release, but I
> think it
> > > > is important that we try to correct this before we get too
> comfortable
> > > > with the current release process.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd suggest to switch to using source snapshots right after M2.
> > >
> > > > It should now be possible to do:
> > > >
> > > >  ant bundle_src
> > > >  mkdir /tmp/build
> > > >  tar -C /tmp/build -xzf target/apache-
> harmony-src-r550411-snapshot.tar.gz
> > > >  cd /tmp/build/harmony-src-550411
> > > >  ant -Dauto.fetch=true
> > > >
> > > > which would seem to me to be more in-keeping with the Apache release
> > > > guidelines.
> > > >
> > > > On this subject, I'd like to permission to commit a patch to correct
> the
> > > > top-level directory name in the source tar.gz/zip files from:
> > > >
> > > >  harmony-src-550411
> > > >
> > > > to:
> > > >
> > > >  apache-harmony-src-r550411
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm OK with it.
> >
> > will it require rebuild of the release candidate?
> >
>
> I think it is not required.
>
> OK, I've built and uploaded milestone candidates (r550333) for
> - Linux x86/x86_64 libstdc++ v5 (and v6 for x86 is in progress)
> - Windows x86/x86_64
>
> The snapshots are available from "snapshots v5" page[1] (or can be
> taken from dir [2])
>
> [1] http://harmony.apache.org/snapshots_v5.html
> [2] http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/r550333/
>
> -Stepan.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Mikhail
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Stepan.
> > >
> > > > The format of the archive names changed over time and these have
> become
> > > > inconsistent.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >  Mark.
> > > >
> > > > > I assume that we still aimed to x86 architecture and I need to
> build
> > > > > milestone candidates for:
> > > > > - Windows x86
> > > > > - Linux x86. BWT, again for both libstdc++ versions?
> > > > >
> > > > > And what about x86_64?
> > > > >
> > > > > As I said M1 includes Windows x86_64. Should we publish them to
> let
> > > > > the community test them to see how good they are?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Stepan.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message