Hi Daniel, thanks for checking/reviewing. So I'll submit with removing the ProblemList.txt entry and I'll also remove the intermittent flag.
Sounds fair to check later if problems will still show up. Although I have the feeling that the issue of https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147431 might appear again... Best regards Christoph > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Fuchs [mailto:daniel.fu...@oracle.com] > Sent: Montag, 23. Januar 2017 17:12 > To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.lan...@sap.com>; Frank Yuan > <frank.y...@oracle.com>; core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: RFR (JAXP) 8169827: > javax/xml/jaxp/isolatedjdk/catalog/PropertiesTest.sh copied JDK failed > > Hi Christoph, > > Thanks for fixing this test! > > I imported your patch, modified ProblemList.txt to not skip the test, > and sent it through our test system, and I'm happy to report that > the test was run on all available platforms with no failure. > > So I think you should simply remove the line from ProblemList.txt > (no need for a new webrev). > If it fails again on more exotic platform we'll simply add it > back to ProblemList.txt for those platforms where it fails > (I guess it could happen if there's not enough disk space). > > Otherwise I have looked over the changes you proposed and they > do seem OK to me. > > +1 > > best regards, > > -- daniel > > On 23/01/17 10:03, Langer, Christoph wrote: > > Hi, > > > > while working on jaxp changes and running jtreg tests I found that test > javax/xml/jaxp/isolatedjdk/catalog/PropertiesTest.sh does not work. I then saw > that this was already reported with bug 8169827. But, as I had already spent > some time to fix this test I'd like to contribute my fix: > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169827 > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8169827.0/ > > > > I converted the test to Java and removed the shell script PropertiesTest.sh. > This resolves the compilation issue. > > > > However, the test needs to copy an isolated jdk as it modifies files in the > > JDK. > So I'm still using the copy script to first copy the jdk and afterwards > remove the > copy. These are separate 'shell' test steps. And in the actual test I'm > running a > child process with the isolated JDK. > > > > I also don't know if the test should be kept in the problem list and/or > > also be > tagged as 'intermittent' as the whole jdk copying procedure by means of a > shell > script seems error prone. In case we keep the entry in the problem list, I can > also open a separate bug for my change. > > > > @Frank: I don't know if you have some larger change in mind which improves > the isolated jdk type testing greatly, otherwise I think this fix could at > least > make things better than they are at the moment. > > > > Thanks & Best regards > > Christoph > >
