Hi Phil,
I haven't confirmed this. I was about to ask for the program but now I
see it is included in the webrev. I'll let you know.
Jennifer
On 4/23/2013 9:27 AM, Phil Race wrote:
That's a Java incident number, not a JDK bug number.
JDK numbers begin with "JDK-8", incident numbers begin with "JI-9"
I imagine jcheck will reject use of that number - it should !
I asked Jennifer to look into this right after you first posted.
Jennifer ?
Off hand I'm not sure I like the proposed patch since it seems to ignore
the point of the existing comment at lines 359-362 ..
-phil.
On 4/22/2013 9:42 PM, Patrick Reinhart wrote:
Hi Jim,
Hi Phil
I just submitted the bug description yesterday again and now
recveived a number:
9001948
I guess the first time it somehow did not work. I already adjusted
the test in ny fix proposal:
http://reinharts.dyndns.org/webrev
Cheers Patrick
Am 22.04.2013 um 23:13 schrieb Jim Graham <james.gra...@oracle.com
<mailto:james.gra...@oracle.com>>:
Hi Patrick,
Since the fix involves printing it may be better to work through
Phil Race since that is more his area. He can hook you up with the
necessary "paperwork" and review/integrate your fixes...
...jim
On 4/18/13 11:18 AM, Patrick Reinhart wrote:
Hi James,
I'm new on this list and would like to submit a fix. Unfortunately
I did not received the bug number for my submitted problem, where I
think I got a fix for.
Could you help me on this?
Cheers
Patrick
Am 17.04.2013 um 22:11 schrieb Patrick Reinhart <patr...@reini.net
<mailto:patr...@reini.net>>:
On Tue, 2013-04-16 at 14:15 +0200, Patrick Reinhart wrote:
Here's the link to suggested fix:
http://reinharts.dyndns.org/webrev/
Cheers Patrick
