In D49354#1125564, @emaste wrote:

Is there a reason not to apply (some of) the patches in the repo directly?

This port is based on my own clone of the openjdk/jdk repo, as there's no bsd openjdk branch or repo from battleblow yet. I'm hoping we can move to battleblow before release.

Anything missing for this to be merged?

Bump PORTREVISION

In D48806#1113263, @jrm wrote:

Sounds good. You also need to bump PORTREVSION.

In D48806#1113261, @jrm wrote:

Should the patch be removed from other JDK ports as well?

@jrm Yeah, I was mostly thinking about the quality of production code backtraces :) A full strip will clearly strip more than just debug info. It will probably make a difference for internal errors in the JVM itself, but not much for code running _on_ the JVM.

@michaelo I don't see any significant change between the output from jstack regardless of the target process running from stripped or non-stripped binaries: https://gist.github.com/snake66/319cdc0772902037610da906c0863d47

In D48223#1105117, @michaelo wrote:

In D48223#1105116, @haraldei_anduin.net wrote:

I think so, but only native code. The stack traces should still include all the information that the JVM itself handles.

Very good, there is likely only case: JVM crashes and dump file does contain any reasonable information for a backtrace.

In D48223#1105110, @michaelo wrote:

It depends, sometimes you simply cannot reproduce on non-prod. Does this affect jstack? This is often requested on the Tomcat mailing lists.

I think this should be ok. There are some parts of the handling of internal errors that tries to look up debug info to get better stacktraces, but I don't think that is important to production deployments.

@glewis With debug enabled I get this more useful message:

#  Internal Error (/home/haraldei/src/openjdk/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/macroAssembler_x86.cpp:4206), pid=14704, tid=109565
#  assert(is_aligned(set.size() * xmm_save_size(), StackAlignmentInBytes)) failed: must be

Update based on feedback:

Update patch based on feedback.

Rebased on top of bofh's openjdk22 additions.

Updated regex in Mk/bsd.java.mk and fixed indentation in openjdk23/Makefile

More changes based on feedback.

In D48194#1098993, @bofh wrote:

I have created a bug report https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283600 for adding the openjdk22. Have a look at it as it will give some idea about the changes required.

Think I got all the parts of Mk/bsd.java.mk covered now, but please check as I'm not all that familiar with how it works.

Update based on feedback.