Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name #212

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 28, 2020

Conversation

douph1
Copy link
Contributor

@douph1 douph1 commented May 25, 2020

Ready to work with artifact OpenJDK_*.zip without major number as we get major java version in job parameter.
All unnumbered (major) zip file is now unzip in a folder "OpenJDK-Latest"

adoptium/temurin-build#1764 is no longer needed for Windows installer.
Fix : adoptium/temurin-build#1712

Need also a revert or fix from adoptium/temurin-build#1754 to return back to normal

This adoptium/temurin-build#1751 is still relevant
and match the JRE|JDK part of #211

@douph1 douph1 force-pushed the jdk_latest branch 7 times, most recently from 81d2828 to e340fa5 Compare May 25, 2020 23:18
@douph1 douph1 changed the title WIP: Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name May 25, 2020
@karianna karianna added this to the May 2020 milestone May 26, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@karianna karianna left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some suggested changes, but all good overall.

@douph1 douph1 changed the title Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name WIP: Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name May 28, 2020
@douph1 douph1 changed the title WIP: Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name Manage unzip of JDK-Latest without number in file name May 28, 2020
@douph1 douph1 merged commit 7675688 into adoptium:master May 28, 2020
@douph1
Copy link
Contributor Author

douph1 commented May 28, 2020

@karianna

failed ...
OpenJDK-Latest unnumbered .\SourceDir\OpenJDK-Latest\hotspot\x64\jdk-15.0.0+24 does not exist

folder inside archive is "jdk-15+24"

Are the 0 always drop ?
what if %PRODUCT_MINOR_VERSION% = 0 and %PRODUCT_MAINTENANCE_VERSION != 0
can we have "jdk-15.1.0+24" and/or "jdk-15.0.1+24"

or the zero drop only if both "minor" and "maintenance" are 0 ?

Please don't send me to read the JEP :) (if we conform to it)

@karianna
Copy link
Contributor

@karianna

failed ...
OpenJDK-Latest unnumbered .\SourceDir\OpenJDK-Latest\hotspot\x64\jdk-15.0.0+24 does not exist

folder inside archive is "jdk-15+24"

Are the 0 always drop ?
what if %PRODUCT_MINOR_VERSION% = 0 and %PRODUCT_MAINTENANCE_VERSION != 0
can we have "jdk-15.1.0+24" and/or "jdk-15.0.1+24"

or the zero drop only if both "minor" and "maintenance" are 0 ?

Please don't send me to read the JEP :) (if we conform to it)

We can definitely have 15.0.1 and 15.1.0 so zero's are not always dropped. I think they might be dropped it's both of them are 0.

You can look at the 14 builds to see how the pattern goes...

@douph1
Copy link
Contributor Author

douph1 commented May 29, 2020

look like it is https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/322
$FEATURE.$INTERIM.$UPDATE.$PATCH

When an element is incremented, all subsequent elements are removed

but I have not found sample where we have 14.1.0
I suppose because when INTERIM is incremented from 0 to 1, UPDATE AND PATCH are removed

but I did not find any version with INTERIM incremented with our API

@karianna
Copy link
Contributor

look like it is https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/322
$FEATURE.$INTERIM.$UPDATE.$PATCH

When an element is incremented, all subsequent elements are removed

but I have not found sample where we have 14.1.0
I suppose because when INTERIM is incremented from 0 to 1, UPDATE AND PATCH are removed

but I did not find any version with INTERIM incremented with our API

It's theoretically possible (as in supported by the JEP, and might be used one day)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

JDK-Next Windows Installer Failing
2 participants