JDK-8255713 : JavaFX build should discover Visual Studio compiler on system
  • Type: Bug
  • Component: javafx
  • Sub-Component: build
  • Affected Version: jfx16
  • Priority: P2
  • Status: Resolved
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • Submitted: 2020-10-31
  • Updated: 2024-08-10
  • Resolved: 2021-03-17
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.
Other
jfx17Fixed
Related Reports
Relates :  
Relates :  
Relates :  
Relates :  
Description
This is a follow-up to JDK-8254691.

 When running a JavaFX github action workflow, we currently hard-code the location of the Visual Studio compiler on the Windows 10 build node that GitHub spins up:

      # FIXME: hard-code the location and version of VS 2019 for now
      VS150COMNTOOLS: "C:\\Program Files (x86)\\Microsoft Visual Studio\\2019\\Enterprise\\VC\\Auxiliary\\Build"
      MSVC_VER: "14.27.29110"

This is fragile and will break if and when this changes on the build system. We should instead modify our build logic to discover the location of the VS compiler on a system in the absence of env variables passed into the build.
Comments
Changeset: 71a7d43c Author: Kevin Rushforth <kcr@openjdk.org> Date: 2021-03-17 20:30:12 +0000 URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/commit/71a7d43c
17-03-2021

GitHub actions are failing again, so this is getting in the way of reviewing fixes on Windows platforms. Raising the priority back to P2
16-03-2021

Lowering to P3, since there is an easy workaround of updating the specific compiler version the next time GitHub bumps it. We should still fix it soon.
14-12-2020

I bumped the priority to P2 and targeted this to openjfx16. It is no longer a theoretical problem, since our builds just started failing. I updated the hard-coded value with JDK-8256686, but we need the real fix soon.
19-11-2020