----- Original Message -----
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> I have pointed out some changes below, but there is a serious
> >> problem.
> >> You are checking for the system arch using uname but the
> >> java architecture may not be the same.
> >>
> >> For example we run 32-bit jdk on a 64bit system, this will cause
> >> test
> >> failures
> >> since we will be using the wrong path names.
> >>
> >> You can use the following to determine the java arch.
> >>
> >> % java -XshowSettings:props -version 2>&1 | grep os.arch
> >>
> > This doesn't work (at least for me) unless the '-version' is
> > removed.
> There was a bug which was fixed in 7u4/u6.
>
This is IcedTea 2.2.1 which is based on OpenJDK 7u4, so the fix must be in 7u6.
Indeed, it does work with a build of tl.
I see no reason to use -version, given all it does is reduce the output
slightly,
and it may fail on the VMs currently in most use.
> >
> > I also note that this seems to only be present in 7 and later (i.e.
> > not 6), not that this will matter in this case.
> Correct, 7 and above.
>
> Kumar
>
> >
> >> other diffs follow.....
> >>
> >> @@ -22,16 +22,17 @@
> >> # questions.
> >>
> >> # @test runtest.sh
> >> -# @bug 9999999
> >> +# @bug 7190813
> >> # @summary Native code linked against libjawt.so should be
> >> sufficent
> >> for libjawt.so to be found
> >> # @run shell runtest.sh
> >>
> >> -if [ "${TESTSRC}" = "" ]
> >> -then TESTSRC=.
> >> +set -x
> >> +
> >> +if [ "${TESTSRC}" = "" ]; then
> >> + TESTSRC=.
> >> fi
> >>
> >> -if [ "${TESTJAVA}" = "" ]
> >> -then
> >> +if [ "${TESTJAVA}" = "" ]; then
> >> PARENT=`dirname \`which java\``
> >> TESTJAVA=`dirname ${PARENT}`
> >> echo "TESTJAVA not set, selecting " ${TESTJAVA}
> >> @@ -46,14 +47,10 @@
> >> PS=":"
> >> FS="/"
> >> ;;
> >> - SunOS | Windows_* )
> >> - echo "Test passed; only valid for Linux"
> >> + * )
> >> + echo "Warning: test passes vacuously for non linux systems"
> >> exit 0;
> >> ;;
> >> - * )
> >> - echo "Unrecognized system!"
> >> - exit 1;
> >> - ;;
> >> esac
> >>
> >> # Get ARCH specifics
> >> @@ -71,13 +68,13 @@
> >>
> >> gcc -v> /dev/null 2>&1
> >> if [ "$?" != 0 ] ; then
> >> - echo "No compiler found"
> >> - exit 1
> >> + echo "Warning: No gcc compiler found, test passes vacuously"
> >> + exit 0
> >> fi
> >>
> >> -JAVAC=${TEST_JAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javac
> >> -JAVAH=${TEST_JAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javah
> >> -JAVA=${TEST_JAVA}${FS}bin${FS}java
> >> +JAVAC=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javac
> >> +JAVAH=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}javah
> >> +JAVA=${TESTJAVA}${FS}bin${FS}java
> >>
> >> $JAVAC -d . ${TESTSRC}${FS}TestJawt.java || exit 1
> >> $JAVAH TestJawt || exit 1
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Kumar
> >>
> >>> On 08/13/2012 10:39 AM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
> >>>> The test looks great, and I like that it doesn't depend on the
> >>>> JAWT
> >>>> machinery, but tests the actual problematic RPATH entry only.
> >>> I generally go for tests that verify behaviour (that jawt-linked
> >>> programs are working) rather than implementation details (which
> >>> changed,
> >>> for example, when we switched from LD_LIBRARY_PATH to RPATHS).
> >>>
> >>>> +1 from me.
> >>> Yes, good to have something that guards us from changing
> >>> something
> >>> unintentionally. Looks fine to me too.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Omair
> >>
>
>
--
Andrew :)
Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/)
Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07
