This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was looking
at it from completely the wrong direction. He contributed the following fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8029525/webrev.01/
This is to avoid a race between:
thread.interrupt();
p.destroy();
Hoping to get this
Hi Rob,
Looks fine. (Not a Reviewer).
Thanks for doing the legwork, Roger
On 12/5/2013 9:19 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was
looking at it from completely the wrong direction. He contributed the
following fix:
On 5 Dec 2013, at 14:40, roger riggs roger.ri...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Rob,
Looks fine. (Not a Reviewer).
+1. Looks ok to me too.
-Chris.
Thanks for doing the legwork, Roger
On 12/5/2013 9:19 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was
On 05/12/2013 14:19, Rob McKenna wrote:
This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was
looking at it from completely the wrong direction. He contributed the
following fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8029525/webrev.01/
This is to avoid a race between:
On 5 Dec 2013, at 19:18, Martin Buchholz marti...@google.com wrote:
You guys are way too trigger-happy.
I guess the reason for this is that there was a deadline today to get changes
into tl before the b120 snapshot. This is one of the final chances to get
non-showstopper changes into JDK
On 05/12/2013 19:42, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 5 Dec 2013, at 19:18, Martin Buchholzmarti...@google.com wrote:
You guys are way too trigger-happy.
I guess the reason for this is that there was a deadline today to get changes
into tl before the b120 snapshot. This is one of the final chances to
Created an issue and attached the patch so it doesn't get lost.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029629
Roger
On 12/5/2013 3:12 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
I understand y'all luhv stability, but ... it's ONLY A TEST!
Also, there's Martin's 4th Law of Software Development:
Developers
