Subject: bug#48977: closed (Re: [bug#48977] [PATCH 4/4] gnu: Add openjdk16.)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2021 17:04:02 +0000

Your bug report

#48977: [PATCH 0/4] Update openjdk 13 and later

which was filed against the guix-patches package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to [email-masked].

-- 
48977: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=48977
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: [bug#48977] [PATCH 4/4] gnu: Add openjdk16.
From: Pierre Langlois <[email-masked]>
To: Julien Lepiller <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Pierre Langlois <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2021 18:03:39 +0100
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Hi Julien,

Julien Lepiller writes:

> Le Sat, 12 Jun 2021 20:54:49 +0100,
> Pierre Langlois <[email-masked]> a écrit :
>
>> +    (arguments
>> +     (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments openjdk15)
>> +       ((#:phases phases)
>> +        `(modify-phases ,phases
>> +           (add-after 'unpack 'make-templates-writable
>> +             (lambda _
>> +               ;; The build system copies a few .template files from
>> the
>> +               ;; source directory into the build directory and then
>> modifies
>> +               ;; them in-place. So these files have to be writable.
>> +               (for-each
>> +                (lambda (file)
>> +                  (invoke "chmod" "u+w" file))
>> +                (find-files
>> "src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/misc/"
>> +                            "\\.template"))
>
> Should be "\\.template$", otherwise the whole series LGTM!

Thanks for the review! Fixed and pushed with
afd4924d6a64c01a1d5138954b9f22c9bd4f4690.

Pierre

Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Update openjdk 13 and later
From: Pierre Langlois <[email-masked]>
To: Guix-patches <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2021 20:45:53 +0100
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

Hi Guix!

Here are a few patches to include the OpenJDK 15 and 16 releases, and
update 13 and 14. The codebase seems to have now moved to git, using
github as the default place to get the code.

Regarding release versions, it seems the scheme was changed for versions
10 and later to $FEATURE.$INTERIM.$UPDATE, where $INTERIM is always
zero, quoting from [0]:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Under the six-month release model the elements of version numbers vary
as follows:

    $FEATURE is incremented every six months: The March 2018 release is
    JDK 10, the September 2018 release is JDK 11, and so forth.

    $INTERIM is always zero, since the six-month model does not include
    interim releases. We reserve it here for flexibility, so that a
    future revision to the release model could include such releases and
    say that JDK $N.1 and JDK $N.2 are compatible upgrades of JDK $N. As
    examples, the JDK 1.4.1 and 1.4.2 releases were, in essence, interim
    releases, and would have been numbered 4.1 and 4.2 under this
    scheme.

    $UPDATE is incremented one month after $FEATURE is incremented, and
    every three months thereafter: The April 2018 release is JDK 10.0.1,
    the July release is JDK 10.0.2, and so forth.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

It seems the easiest thing to do is to refer to "GA" releases, for
"general availability" with git tags that look like "jdk-<version>-ga".

I've done it for OpenJDK 13 and later, however if we change 10, 11 and
12, it looks like a downgrade, is that a problem? 

Thanks,
Pierre

[0]: https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/322