> On 31 Jul 2015, at 11:12, Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Volker Simonis > <volker.simo...@gmail.com <mailto:volker.simo...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Roger Riggs <roger.ri...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> Hi Volker, >>> >>> There is already as task for JMC to move that file but who knows exactly >>> when. >>> >>> A list of exception(s) would be better I think, because generally, >>> everything in bin should be executable. >>> WDYT? >>> >> >> OK, I'm fine with that. >> Unfortunately I'll have to hurry home now. >> I'll do the change tomorrow (or you can take over if it's urgent). >> > > So here comes the new version: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8132704.v2 > <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8132704.v2>
This change looks good to me Volker. > I've added 'jmc.ini' to the exclude list for now. > Could you please check if there are other files I should add to the > list before pushing? I believe that jmc.ini is the only one. > Do you have a bug ID for the task to move 'jmc.ini' out of the bin > direcotry. I think it should be updated with a link to this bug and > with the info to remove 'jmc.ini' from the exclude list once the file > has been moved away from bin. -Chris. > Regards, > Volker > >> Regards, >> Volker >> >>> Roger >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7/30/2015 11:40 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Roger Riggs <roger.ri...@oracle.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Volker, >>> >>> Possibly the real bug is that there is non-executable file in the bin >>> directory. >>> There is a /conf directory which would probably be a better place for that. >>> >>> Yes, I agree. But I thought you want a fast fix for the test failure :) >>> Moving that config file is probably a bigger effort. >>> >>> Moreover the bin/ directory on Windows also contains .dll and .diz >>> files. However on Windows, all the files seem to be executable (at >>> least the test did succeed before). Nevertheless, checking only a >>> known subset of executables seems safer and "good enough". >>> >>> What do you think? >>> Volker >>> >>> Roger >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7/30/2015 11:28 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> can somebody please review this test fix: >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8132704/ >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8132704 >>> >>> The initial test checked that all the files in the bin/ directory are >>> executable by everybody. Unfortunately this was too optimistic because >>> in the closed build the bin/ directory contains configuration files >>> which are not executable. >>> >>> The new version of the test uses a predefined static list of >>> executables which are checked for the executable permissions if the >>> corresponding files exist. >>> >>> Thank you and best regards, >>> Volker
