On 05/06/2015 15:07, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
This review request covers the main part of the work for JEP-223, the
new version string format [1]. Basically, we'll call this release Java
"9", instead of Java "1.9.0".
This patch is a folding of all work that has been done so far in the
branch JEP-223-branch in jdk9/sandbox. As you can see, it mostly
covers build changes, with some code changes in hotspot, jdk, nashorn
and langtools that either are corresponding changes in the product
code due to the compiler define flags changing from the build, or
follow-up changes to handle the new format.
The JEP-223 work is not finished by this patch. In fact, there are
known issues remaining even after this patch, typically by code that
reads the "java.version" property and tries to parse it. However, this
patch is not directly destined for jdk9/dev, but will go into the
special verona/stage forest. As for all patches destined for
verona/stage it will be code reviewed as if going to jdk9/dev. Once in
verona/stage it will bide its time, and it will be complemented with
follow-up patches to address remaining issues. When all such issues
are resolved and JEP-223 is fully implemented, all changes will be
pushed at once (without further code reviews) into jdk9/dev.
This patch has been contributed by Magnus Ihse Bursie, Kumar
Srinivasan and Alejandro Murillo.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8085822
WebRev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8085822-JEP-223-initial-patch/webrev.01
I looked through the code changes, skipping most of the make files :-)
Version.java.template - the comment in jvmSecurityVersion() still talks
about 1.6 and newer. Can this be replaced to just say that it returns
the security version?
Will the update_version and special_update_version fields eventually be
dropped from the jvm_version_info stricture? Related, there seems to be
a typo in the comment in jdk_util.c where it has "specia_update_version".
The webrev shows a change to this comment in jvm.h:
"Third, this file contains various I/O and network operations needed
by the standard Java I/O and network APIs."
I think this comment can be removed because those JVM_* functions were
removed some time ago.
Otherwise looks okay to me.
-Alan.
