[blfs-dev] Mercurial or wget for openjdk?

Douglas R. Reno renodr2002 at gmail.com
Sat Sep 5 14:03:48 PDT 2015


On Sep 5, 2015 4:00 PM, "Pierre Labastie" <pierre.labastie at neuf.fr> wrote:
>
> On 05/09/2015 20:02, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> > Em 05-09-2015 13:40, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
> >> Pierre Labastie wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for discussing this again, but before the timing given below, I
was
> >>> wondering what the best approach for downloading OpenJDK files was.
Using
> >>> mercurial, it amounts to:
> >>> ----------
> >>> hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u<rev>
> >>> cd jdk8u<rev>
> >>> sh get_source.sh
> >>> sh common/bin/hgforest.sh update -r jdk8u<rev>-b<build> # not really
> >>> needed
> >>> ----------
> >>> Note that mercurial is needed (obviously), but mercurial depends only
on
> >>> Python, which is a very basic package, and builds very fast (a few
> >>> tenths of
> >>> SBU). hgforest is optimized to retrieve several repositories at the
> >>> same time,
> >>> so the download time is not too long. Actually, timing gives:
> >>> -------------
> >>> time (
> >>> hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u60
> >>> cd jdk8u60
> >>> sh get_source.sh
> >>> sh common/bin/hgforest.sh update -r jdk8u60-b27 )
> >>> ...
> >>> real    6m31.868s
> >>> user    0m0.896s
> >>> sys     0m0.060s
> >>>
> >>> The other approach is to use wget to download tarballs, as proposed by
> >>> Fernando. For measuring download+unpack time, I use a version slightly
> >>> different from
> >>>
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-dev/2015-May/030258.html:
> >>>
> >>> time (
> >>> PACKAGE=jdk8u60-b27.tar.bz2
> >>> URL=http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u60
> >>> URL_END=archive/$PACKAGE
> >>> wget $URL/$URL_END
> >>> tar xf $PACKAGE
> >>> for additional in corba hotspot jaxp jaxws langtools jdk nashorn; do
> >>>    wget $URL/$additional/$URL_END -O $additional.tar.bz2
> >>>    mkdir -p jdk8u60-jdk8u60-b27/$additional
> >>>    tar --stripcomponents=1 \
> >>>        -C jdk8u60-jdk8u60-b27/$additional \
> >>>        -x -f $additional.tar.bz2
> >>> done
> >>> )
> >>> ...
> >>> real    2m56.273s
> >>> user    0m8.716s
> >>> sys     0m2.472s
> >>>
> >>> So definitely, the wget approach is shorter. OTOH the mercurial
> >>> approach is
> >>> much simpler and less prone to errors. If using wget, I think I'll use
> >>> some
> >>> approach similar to what we do for X, as suggested by Fernando, but it
> >>> would
> >>> be still complicated, unless maybe we make a file with 4 fields per
line:
> >>> tarball-name, md5 extracted-dirname, final-dirname.
> >>
> >> Using mercurial provides an example for that version control package.
I
> >> don't wee a problem with doing OpenJDK with mercurial.
> >>
> >> Note, I only build OPenJDK for testing the book.  I cannot recall
> >> needing or using it in other circumstances.
> >>
> >>   -- Bruce
> >>
> >
> > BTW,
> >
> > I don't use BLFS for JDK for about a year or more. Only upstream
> > proprietary binaries.
> >
>
> Hmm, should I understand that nobody is using OpenJDK, so that it should
be
> archived? I am not specially fan of updating OpenJDK myself, since I do
not
> use it either, and it is just a mess to build and test...
>
> Pierre

I use it for my own projects, and I know of a few things in BLFS that can
use it optionally, and I am sure that there are a few things in BLFS that
use it. My BluRay stuff needs it for menus as well.

Douglas R. Reno
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-dev/attachments/20150905/8ffddada/attachment.html>


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list