----- Original Message ----- > On 02/26/2014 06:24 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> On 02/26/2014 02:47 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > >>> This should be backported. It fixes this along with other such issues: > >>> > >>> changeset: 3029:871cffb21423 > >>> user: alanb > >>> date: Thu Oct 07 14:36:17 2010 +0100 > >>> summary: 6989466: Miscellaneous compiler warnings in java/lang, > >>> java/util, java/io, sun/misc native code > >>> > >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/jdk/rev/871cffb21423 > >> > >> Heavens, that's a big patch. Why do we want it all? > > > > Fairly long, but nothing controversial. > > > > I'd rather keep us in sync with 7 than creating new bugs & patches that > > make it harder to trace things later. > > OK, but that is a really important semantic change buried in a patch that > is just a ton of warning fixes. As an example of bad process that is pretty > hard to beat, even if it does tick all the boxes. > > Warning fix patches have a horrible history of breaking things. We can hope > that these patches will all work when back ported, but how do you know that > they do? > > Andrew. > >
Well, it depends how close the code is. Having looked at backporting it, I feel too much has changed to risk it. We need an OPENJDK-6 bug for this that references the fact the change is in 6989466. You can list me as a reviewer. -- 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
