OK +1 to this as well. Equally trivial. /M
> On 30 Jan 2015, at 12:25, Attila Szegedi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the approval. I have identified yet another change that needs to > be made, though; a test for as backported for JDK-8066232 was incomplete (it > was incomplete in 9 too - I investigated the history of it in 9 and saw that > it was just fixed later in a 9-only changeset). A new webrev is at > <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8071991/webrev.01> with a trivial > addition to test/script/basic/JDK-8066232.js. I also updated the bug to > reflect it's now a more general "fix all build/test issues introduced by the > last two Nashorn backports". > > I can confirm that with these two changes all tests pass, so this should be > the final word on this. > > Attila. > > On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Seán Coffey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Looks fine. Thanks for jumping on this. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Please add >> noreg-build and 9-na labels. >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 30/01/2015 11:05, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: >>>> Please review JDK-8071991 at >>>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8071991/webrev.00> for >>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071991> >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a >>>> compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I >>>> failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now >>>> breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes >>>> too so this can't cause issues in the future. >>>> >>>> Thanks and apologies, >>>> Attila. >>> >> >
