Re: RFR: 8240903: Add a regression test for JDK-8240734 [v4]

2022-03-29 Thread Dongbo He
an be produced stably with at least 64 modules. > Note that we need to add the --date jmod option to avoid the timestamp issue. > > Testing: > Added test case fails without fix for JDK-8240734, and passes otherwise. > Tested with tier2 on linux x86. Dongbo He has updated the

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add a regression test for JDK-8240734 [v3]

2022-03-29 Thread Dongbo He
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:54:52 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > The existing tests for the jmod tool are in test/jdk/tools/jmod. > HashesTest.java might provide inspiration to avoid introducing a shell test. Hi, Alan I have rewritten this test in Java in the latest commit. - PR:

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add test to check that jmod hashes are reproducible [v5]

2022-03-29 Thread Dongbo He
an be produced stably with at least 64 modules. > Note that we need to add the --date jmod option to avoid the timestamp issue. > > Testing: > Added test case fails without fix for JDK-8240734, and passes otherwise. > Tested with tier2 on linux x86. Dongbo He has updated the pul

RFR: 8240903: Add a regression test for JDK-8240734

2022-03-24 Thread Dongbo He
This creates a regression test for JDK-8240734. This was once blocked by a time stamp issue which has been resolved by: [JDK-8276766 ](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8276766) We found the issue can always be produced with at least 64 modules. Note that we need to add the --date jmod

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add a regression test for JDK-8240734 [v3]

2022-03-24 Thread Dongbo He
an be produced stably with at least 64 modules. > Note that we need to add the --date jmod option to avoid the timestamp issue. > > Testing: > Added test case fails without fix for JDK-8240734, and passes otherwise. > Tested with tier2 on linux x86. Dongbo He has updated the

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add a regression test for JDK-8240734 [v2]

2022-03-24 Thread Dongbo He
hat we need to add the --date jmod option to avoid the timestamp issue. > > Testing: > Added test case fails before JDK-8240734, and passes after JDK-8240734. > Tested with tier2 on linux x86. Dongbo He has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add test to check that jmod hashes are reproducible [v3]

2022-04-06 Thread Dongbo He
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:54:52 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> Dongbo He has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Get date by 'date +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S%:z' > > The existing tests for the jmod t

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add test to check that jmod hashes are reproducible [v5]

2022-04-08 Thread Dongbo He
On Fri, 8 Apr 2022 09:26:08 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: > I think this looks okay. Can you say how long the test runs for you? It > creates 130 JMOD files and I'm just wondering if the default timeout is > enough when running with debug builds. The following is the test result on linux x86 with

Re: RFR: 8240903: Add test to check that jmod hashes are reproducible [v5]

2022-04-15 Thread Dongbo He
On Wed, 30 Mar 2022 01:55:30 GMT, Dongbo He wrote: >> This creates a regression test for >> [JDK-8240734](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8240734). This was >> once blocked >> by a time stamp issue which has been resolved by: [JDK-8276766 >> ](https:

Integrated: 8240903: Add test to check that jmod hashes are reproducible

2022-04-15 Thread Dongbo He
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 01:50:04 GMT, Dongbo He wrote: > This creates a regression test for > [JDK-8240734](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8240734). This was > once blocked > by a time stamp issue which has been resolved by: [JDK-8276766 > ](https://bugs.openjdk.java