Re: RFR 8164705: Remove pathname canonicalization from FilePermission

Have you finished the deeper pass? :-) Thanks Max On 9/2/2016 8:18, Brian Burkhalter wrote: At the API level and conceptually this all appears reasonable. I am going to need to take a deeper pass over it all however to comprehend the implementation at any kind of detailed level. The changes

RE: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8087303 LSSerializer pretty print does not work anymore

Hi Aleksey Thank you very much for your review an comments! > -Original Message- > From: Aleksey Shipilev [mailto:sh...@redhat.com] > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 6:45 PM > To: Frank Yuan; 'core-libs-dev' > Subject: Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8087303 LSSerializer pretty print does not work

Re: RFR 8164705: Remove pathname canonicalization from FilePermission

On 9/13/2016 2:13, Brian Burkhalter wrote: Only picky comments: not sure but maybe change: 1) vice versa -> and vice versa 2) When it’s set to true -> When true 3) just like before -> as before All accepted. Thanks Max Brian On Sep 12, 2016, at 12:23 AM, Weijun Wang

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

I guess I’m going to keep doing this until I get it right ;-) Here’s another webrev that doesn’t use an exception for a common case, and addresses most of Mandy concerns. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.06/ Comments

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

Hi Patrick, Thank you very much for the offer to hold my patch for me! Is it common practice to send patches to others using PGP? Kind regards, Jonathan On 12 September 2016 at 21:08, Patrick Reinhart wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > As just also wanted to help some more clean-up

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

> On Sep 12, 2016, at 2:17 PM, Steve Drach wrote: > > Here’s a new webrev addressing Paul’s additional concerns > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.04/ > This version looks good. Can you add

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

Here’s a new webrev addressing Paul’s additional concerns http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.04/ > Ok, better. Now there is no need to create an instance of VersionedStream, > all methods can be static. Done > > I

RFR: 8165524: Better detect JRE that Linux JLI will be using

Hello, I am sponsoring this changeset for Chris Bensen of the java packager team, please review fix for the launcher to better locate java.home. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ksrini/8165524/ Thanks Kumar

RFR 9: 8165261: RMI API to export an object with a serialization filter

Please review an update to enable serialization filtering for exported RMI objects. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-rmi-filter-8165261/ Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165261 Thanks, Roger

Re: RFR 9: 8155760 Implement Serialization Filtering

Hi Daniel, Thanks for the review and suggestions: Updated in place: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-serial-filter-jdk9-8155760/ SpecDiff: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/filter-diffs/overview-summary.html Javadoc (subset)

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

Hi Jonathan, As just also wanted to help some more clean-up in the JDKs final phase, I could offer you to hold that patch. Just send it to me and I will prepare the webrev for you…. -Patrick > Am 12.09.2016 um 20:36 schrieb Jonathan Bluett-Duncan > : > > Hi David,

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

> On 12 Sep 2016, at 12:36, Steve Drach wrote: > >>> I made a simple change, the new webrev is >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.02/ >>> >>> >> >> I don’t like the state interplay between

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

Here’s a new webrev that addresses Claes’ and Paul’s concerns http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.03/ > On Sep 11, 2016, at 1:12 PM, Steve Drach wrote: > > I made a simple change, the new webrev is

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

>> I made a simple change, the new webrev is >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.02/ >> >> > > I don’t like the state interplay between allowedVersions and getBaseSuffix, > and the filtering for null. Consider merging

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

> jdk/internal/util/jar/VersionedStream.java: > > - use Integer.parseInt(name, vptr, ptr, 10) to avoid creating vstr on > every entry done > > - folding allowedVersions into getBaseSuffix seems easier than to keep > global state (sptr) and splitting the logic over a filter and a map >

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output whenDriverManager is initially loaded

Hello, It looks like the test passes when the IOException happens (skips assert). Besides, what about actually providing a well known driver (only?). Then you dont have to depend on the debug output. Gruss Bernd -- http://bernd.eckenfels.net >From Win 10 Mobile Von: Lance Andersen

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

I see. Thanks for explaining a "short" / 20-year history in a couple of sentences :-) -Joe On 9/12/16, 11:24 AM, Lance Andersen wrote: On Sep 12, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Joe Wang > wrote: On 9/12/16, 10:21 AM, Lance Andersen wrote: Hi

Re: RFR: 8163798: Create a JarFile versionedStream method

> On 11 Sep 2016, at 13:12, Steve Drach wrote: > > I made a simple change, the new webrev is > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8163798/webrev.02/ > > I don’t like the state interplay between allowedVersions

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8134373: explore potential uses of convenience factories within the JDK

Hi David, Thanks for letting me know about the attachment stripping behaviour, and reminding me about the current state of the JDK 9 release schedule. Stuart, would you be happy to host my patch on cr.openjdk.java.net? If not, do you know who else might be happy to host it for me? Or

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

> On Sep 12, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: > > >> On 12 Sep 2016, at 10:15, Lance Andersen > > wrote: >>> >>> Suggestion: >>> >>> 70 try (BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new >>>

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

> On Sep 12, 2016, at 2:20 PM, Joe Wang wrote: > > > > On 9/12/16, 10:21 AM, Lance Andersen wrote: >> >> Hi Joe, >>> On Sep 12, 2016, at 1:17 PM, Joe Wang >> > wrote: >>> >>> Hi Lance, >>> >>> Since this

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

On 9/12/16, 10:21 AM, Lance Andersen wrote: Hi Joe, On Sep 12, 2016, at 1:17 PM, Joe Wang > wrote: Hi Lance, Since this change adds a test only, I assume the issue was fixed in another bug, it would be good to add a link in JBS. Yes

Re: RFR: 8165890: [TESTBUG] Compilation issue in MultiReleaseJarTest after 8165723

Thanks for the quick review, Joe! Pushed. /Claes On 2016-09-12 20:10, joe darcy wrote: Approved; cheers, -Joe On 9/12/2016 11:07 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165890 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8165890/webrev.01/ Thanks

Re: RFR 8164705: Remove pathname canonicalization from FilePermission

Only picky comments: not sure but maybe change: 1) vice versa -> and vice versa 2) When it’s set to true -> When true 3) just like before -> as before Brian On Sep 12, 2016, at 12:23 AM, Weijun Wang wrote: > BTW, please also review the release note at > >

Re: RFR: jsr166 jdk9 integration wave 10

On 09/12/2016 07:57 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > is better spelled like this? > > 176 * setPendingCount(1); // only one pending, not two! > > I already struggled over the wording here hmmm ... how about > > // looks off by one, but correct! Yes, this is better. > I

Re: RFR: 8165890: [TESTBUG] Compilation issue in MultiReleaseJarTest after 8165723

Approved; cheers, -Joe On 9/12/2016 11:07 AM, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165890 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8165890/webrev.01/ Thanks (sorry)! /Claes

RFR: 8165890: [TESTBUG] Compilation issue in MultiReleaseJarTest after 8165723

Hi, bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165890 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8165890/webrev.01/ Thanks (sorry)! /Claes

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

> On 12 Sep 2016, at 10:15, Lance Andersen wrote: >> >> Suggestion: >> >> 70 try (BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new >> CharArrayReader(cw.toCharArray( { >> 71 boolean result >> 72 = reader.lines().anyMatch(

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8087303 LSSerializer pretty print does not work anymore

Hi Frank, I was thinking we could just fix the current issue. Then in order to be consistent among different processors, we made wider changes. As you said, we're not backward-compatible anymore. That, and plus xml:space, it looks like a CCC can not be avoided. If that's what we have to do,

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

Hi Joe, > On Sep 12, 2016, at 1:17 PM, Joe Wang wrote: > > Hi Lance, > > Since this change adds a test only, I assume the issue was fixed in another > bug, it would be good to add a link in JBS. Yes I had planned to do that > > It seems the initialization log has

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

Hi Lance, Since this change adds a test only, I assume the issue was fixed in another bug, it would be good to add a link in JBS. It seems the initialization log has changed, no longer prints the first 2 lines. It might be worth it to add a note/comment in the JBS along with link to the

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

> On Sep 12, 2016, at 1:05 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: > >> >> On 12 Sep 2016, at 09:29, Lance Andersen wrote: >> >> Happy Monday, >> >> This RFR is to add a test to validate that the DriverManager.println output >> is accessible when

Re: RFR 9: 8155760 Implement Serialization Filtering

Hi Roger, ObjectInputStream.java: some cosmetic comments: 317 * {@link ObjectInputFilter.Config#getSerialFilter() the process-wide filter}. 352 * {@link ObjectInputFilter.Config#getSerialFilter() the process-wide filter}. => should be @linkplain 1185 * The filter, when not

Re: RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

> On 12 Sep 2016, at 09:29, Lance Andersen wrote: > > Happy Monday, > > This RFR is to add a test to validate that the DriverManager.println output > is accessible when DriverManager is first loaded. > > The webrev can be found at: >

Re: RFR: jsr166 jdk9 integration wave 10

> On 12 Sep 2016, at 09:57, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Aleksey Shipilev > wrote: > > Minor things: > > CountedCompleter.java: > > 176 * setPendingCount(1); // not off by one !

Re: RFR: jsr166 jdk9 integration wave 10

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:22 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > > Minor things: > > CountedCompleter.java: > > 176 * setPendingCount(1); // not off by one ! > > is better spelled like this? > > 176 * setPendingCount(1); // only one pending, not two! > I already

Re: RFR: 8165723: JarFile::isMultiRelease() method returns false when it should return true

> On 12 Sep 2016, at 08:10, Claes Redestad wrote: > > On 2016-09-12 16:24, Alan Bateman wrote: >> This looks okay. > > Thanks for the review! > >> For the MultiReleaseJarAPI test then you probably should use >> jdk.testlibrary.RandomFactory so that the seed is

RFR 8159126 Add test to validate DriverManager.println output when DriverManager is initially loaded

Happy Monday, This RFR is to add a test to validate that the DriverManager.println output is accessible when DriverManager is first loaded. The webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lancea/8159126/webrev.00/ Ran JPRT to

Re: RFR: jsr166 jdk9 integration wave 10

> On 10 Sep 2016, at 10:21, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/jsr166-jdk9-integration/ > +1 CountedCompleter — 176 * setPendingCount(1); // not off by one ! CountedCompleterTest — 1910

Re: JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8165818: Remove tools/pack200/Pack200Props.java from ProblemList

Looks good. Thanks for looking into this. Kumar On 9/12/16 11:38 AM, Amy Lu wrote: tools/pack200/Pack200Props.java This test was put into ProblemList.txt in 9/117 due to test timed out issue: JDK-8155857. Test failure (timed out) is reproducible with 9/117 and 9/118, but issue gone in

Re: RFR: 8165723: JarFile::isMultiRelease() method returns false when it should return true

On 2016-09-12 16:24, Alan Bateman wrote: This looks okay. Thanks for the review! For the MultiReleaseJarAPI test then you probably should use jdk.testlibrary.RandomFactory so that the seed is recorded in the output for when the test fails. Done. Also in CreateMultiReleaseTestJars then

Re: RFR: 8165723: JarFile::isMultiRelease() method returns false when it should return true

On 10/09/2016 01:58, Claes Redestad wrote: Hi, JDK-8152733 introduced a corner-case where isMultiRelease returns false when it should return true due to an erroneously hand-crafted Boyer-Moore search. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8165723/webrev.01/ Bug:

Re: Discussion core-libs-dev Digest, Vol 113, Issue 35

Could we update the Iterator, so it supports manipulation on the Collection itself, and not throw UnsupportedOperationException during the time of iteration? On Sep 12, 2016 9:29 AM, wrote: Send core-libs-dev mailing list submissions to

RE: Make iterators cloneable?

No, It breaks on Fi (or Fum) in the inner loop before it gets the chance to output Fi-Fum (or Fum-Fi) if Fi (respectively Fum) comes first in iteration order. -- Have a nice day, Timo Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Dave Brosius

Re: RFR 8165772: fix for 8165595 results in failure of jdk/test/tools/launcher/VersionCheck.java

+1 > On Sep 12, 2016, at 9:32 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan > wrote: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165772 > > This VersionCheck.java test failed after main class was added to nashorn > modules. VersionCheck expects all jdk/bin

Re: RFR 8165772: fix for 8165595 results in failure of jdk/test/tools/launcher/VersionCheck.java

On 12/09/2016 13:32, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165772 This VersionCheck.java test failed after main class was added to nashorn modules. VersionCheck expects all jdk/bin tools to be derived from the standard launcher. But, jlink generates

Re: RFR 8165772: fix for 8165595 results in failure of jdk/test/tools/launcher/VersionCheck.java

Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165772 This VersionCheck.java test failed after main class was added to nashorn modules. VersionCheck expects all jdk/bin tools to be derived from the standard launcher. But, jlink generates shell scripts and batch files for modules with main class.

Re: RFR (JAXP) JDK-8087303 LSSerializer pretty print does not work anymore

On 09/12/2016 12:54 PM, Frank Yuan wrote: > Would you like to review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fyuan/8087303/webrev.01/? Not an expert in the XML parsing area, so only a cursory code review: ToStream.java: *) Bad camel casing: 113 protected boolean m_ispreserveSpace = false; *)

Re: RFR: jsr166 jdk9 integration wave 10

On 09/10/2016 08:21 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/jsr166-jdk9-integration/ > > Mostly docs and tests. Looks good. Very nice use of (frequently overlooked) local classes in examples. Minor things: CountedCompleter.java: 176 *

RFR (JAXP) JDK-8087303 LSSerializer pretty print does not work anymore

Hi Would you like to review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fyuan/8087303/webrev.01/? Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8087303 In this patch, I add handling for whitespace text node and support for xml:space attribute in xml serializer. Thanks, Frank

Re: Make iterators cloneable?

That would give you unwanted duplicates Fi-Fum and Fum-Fi for instance On 09/11/2016 08:58 PM, Tagir Valeev wrote: Actually given the fact that we're iterating the Set (so the elements are unique) and using the assumption that iteration of the same set is stable, you can avoid numbering

Re: RFR 8164705: Remove pathname canonicalization from FilePermission

BTW, please also review the release note at https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165836 Thanks Max On 9/1/2016 22:25, Weijun Wang wrote: Webrev updated at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8164705/webrev.01