Hi Phil, On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 09:56 -0700, Jennifer Godinez wrote: > 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 !
This is not the case as I did run the test before and after my fix to prove that it works. Thanks anyway for the hint. > > 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 .. Good point! I missed that by the excitement about my fix ;-) I did take this in account now and updated my webrev accordingly. I introduced a createPrintService() method that replaces 3 identical code parts within the existing UnixPrintServiceLookup and used this method now on the existing getNamedPrinterNameBSD() and getNamedPrinterNameSysV() methods. Cheers Patrick
