openjdk6 @b20 build error on ppc

[gkatze@…]

As a follow up to #27891 i report that building openjdk6 is still not possible on PowerPC. The ppc architecture was enabled in r74926 but is still not compiling because of missing architecture in openjdk6_bootstrap.

[balajeerc@…]

Cc Me!

[dougmencken@…]

I'm suffering the same bug, see #37205

Since 23 months, still no solution? By the way, what about OpenJDK 1.7 and 1.8 on POWER?

[landonf (Landon Fuller)]

The OpenJDK 6 port is a genuine port -- OpenJDK relies on a large amount of architecture and OS-specific code, and we have to do actual development and merging work to maintain the port on Mac OS X. These changes have been integrated upstream for OpenJDK 7 and 8, but OpenJDK 6 still does not support Mac OS X upstream, and OpenJDK does not support Mac/PPC at all.

Since I have no PPC machines, it's up to someone else if they want to bother supporting OpenJDK6/PPC. Despite there being no end of complaint from PPC users over there years, there have not been any developers that have stepped forward to assist, nor has there been any interest in funding the requisite development. This is not hugely surprising, as the cost of paying a capable engineer to produce a viable Mac/PPC build could easily outstrip the cost of just buying a new Mac.

Given that OpenJDK 6 itself will soon be EOL'd, the fact that it's not supported for Mac OS X upstream, and that there doesn't appear to be any development interest from other engineers in supporting it, I will probably just delete the ports.

[dougmencken@…]

OpenJDK relies on a large amount of architecture and OS-specific code

Well, I heard about Zero VM and the dependencies for OpenJDK on OS X: X11, Mesa, Motif, for example.

OpenJDK 6 still does not support Mac OS X upstream, and OpenJDK does not support Mac/PPC at all.

So I should contact the upstream then? What about other Java VM implementations on OS X? JamVM?

sh-3.2# port search jamvm
jamvm @1.5.0 (lang, java)
    compact Java 2 Virtual Machine

(Looks like Java 1.5)

[landonf (Landon Fuller)]

Replying to dougmencken@…:

OpenJDK relies on a large amount of architecture and OS-specific code

Well, I heard about Zero VM and the dependencies for OpenJDK on OS X: X11, Mesa, Motif, for example.

Yes, Zero VM can be used to produce a PPC port, but there is no upstream support for it. I provided some PPC binaries based on zero some time ago; getting this working again would be a sizable effort.

OpenJDK 6 still does not support Mac OS X upstream, and OpenJDK does not support Mac/PPC at all.

So I should contact the upstream then?

You're free to, but you're unlikely to find any significant interest unless you're ready to do the porting work, and even then, you'll have more luck with the BSD porting team than the Apple team, as the Mac OS X port (which is based on the BSD port) relies on features added in later OS X releases than are available for PPC.

What about other Java VM implementations on OS X? JamVM?

sh-3.2# port search jamvm
jamvm @1.5.0 (lang, java)
    compact Java 2 Virtual Machine

(Looks like Java 1.5)

JamVM is not a compliant Java(TM) implementation, isn't based on OpenJDK, and you'll run into issues trying to run most complex Java software.

[dougmencken@…]

Yes, Zero VM can be used to produce a PPC port, but there is no upstream support for it. I provided some PPC binaries based on zero some time ago; getting this working again would be a sizable effort.

So you don't want to work on it and marked this issue as "won't fix" :(

You're free to, but you're unlikely to find any significant interest unless you're ready to do the porting work, and even then, you'll have more luck with the BSD porting team than the Apple team, as the Mac OS X port (which is based on the BSD port) relies on features added in later OS X releases than are available for PPC.

As I understand, making something more portable does mean making it more portable. Regardless any marketing, Apple CPU changing etc. I contacted OpenJDK team.

JamVM is not a compliant Java(TM) implementation, isn't based on OpenJDK, and you'll run into issues trying to run most complex Java software.

JamVM from MacPorts is stuck with failing GNU Classpath, my ticket: ​https://trac.macports.org/ticket/37219

[landonf (Landon Fuller)]

So you don't want to work on it and marked this issue as "won't fix" :( UPD: Can you please re-open it?

If there's someone else willing to do the genuinely time consuming and difficult work, then I'll be happy to reopen the bug. That hasn't happened yet in 3-4 years, so I'm not holding my breath.

I've already invested an enormous amount of my personal time in bringing OpenJDK to Mac OS X to begin with, and am not particularly interested in spending even more of my time supporting a platform that I don't need, and has been off the market for 7 years now.

As I understand, making something more portable does mean making it more portable. Regardless any marketing, Apple CPU changing etc. I contacted OpenJDK team.

"Portable" doesn't really mean much when you're talking about hand-coded assembly templates, architecture-specific JIT, non-portable OS-specific signal handling code that introspects the faulting code to determine whether divide-by-zero occurred, and a slew of other things that are necessarily and inescapably OS-specific.

OpenJDK is a big, exceedingly complex piece of software, and porting it is not as simple as recompiling it.

[cooljeanius (Eric Gallager)]

Cc Me!