[Buildroot] Question about current OpenJDK source site.

James Hilliard james.hilliard1 at gmail.com
Mon Nov 25 01:56:28 UTC 2019


On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 6:29 PM Tudor Holton <tudor at smartguide.com.au> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'm working on upstreaming some development we've done on OpenJDK for
> Buildroot over the past few years and I'm in the process of trying to
> simplifying the diffs for submission.
>
> I have a simple question which I'm directing towards Adam Duskett, but
> I'm open to answers for anyone who contributed to making this decision.
>
> I understand, historically, that getting a mirrorable copy of OpenJDK
> was hard because of previous issues with Mercurial forests.  Our own
> previous versions of this package have used an intermediate Mercurial
> forest consolidation server so we can easily restart source downloads.
> However, recent developments in Buildroot makes this no longer an issue.
>
> I'm hesitant to make a diff submission that changes OPENJDK_SITE, but I
> cannot seem to find any authoritative reference that says that source
> downloads should come from anywhere other than java.net.  The current
> release comes from github.com/AdoptOpenJDK which references
> adoptopenjdk.net.  AdoptOpenJDK.net states that they are "a community of
> Java User Group (JUG) members, Java developers and vendors" but not
> anything that is conclusive about their relationship with Oracle or
> upstream OpenJDK itself, and java.net never references them in any way.
> This makes me suspicious about the guarantees of the source.
AdoptOpenJDK is generally the recommended source for java from what
I've seen, it's fairly well know and run by companies such as Red Hat last
I checked.
>
> Why does the current version of the OpenJDK package* use AdoptOpenJDK as
> the upstream source rather than the official source release at
> https://hg.openjdk.java.net/[project]/[release]/archive?
The java.net site is closed/deprecated from the looks of it.
>
> Is this just historic or is there some intended reason to use a
> downstream source?
>From what I've seen it's generally not recommended to use oracle distributions
due to unstable download urls. For example you can no longer download
Java 8 from oracle without an account since the latest version they distribute
moved to commercial licensing.
>
> Regards,
> Tudor Holton
>
> P.S. For clarity, I am specifically referring to packages/openjdk and
> not packages/openjdk-bin.  I understand the need to obtain binaries from
> certain sources.
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot



More information about the buildroot mailing list