Hi Chris,
this is fine, too.
Best regards, Goetz.
> -Original Message-
> From: Langer, Christoph
> Sent: Montag, 28. Januar 2019 23:28
> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz
> Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net
> Subject: RE: RFR [11u backport]: 8034802: (zipfs) newFileSystem throws UOE
> when the
Hi Goetz,
> Patching the file myself really helped to see there are no real changes.
>
> For the missing patch of the constructor I understand it was only an arbitrary
> reordering of arguments you omitted. Thus the whole chunk disappeared.
> This makes sense, and in case someone downports the
Hi Christoph,
Patching the file myself really helped to see there are no real changes.
For the missing patch of the constructor I understand it was only an arbitrary
reordering of arguments you omitted. Thus the whole chunk disappeared. This
makes sense, and in case someone downports the other
Hi Alan,
thanks for your view on this backport request even though you aren't involved
in jdk11u any longer.
> The support for zip files located in file systems created by custom
> providers was essentially a new feature in JDK 12 so it may not have got
> a lot of usage yet. There has been a
Hi Goetz,
>
> And I see much more differences if I compare the diffs.
>
> Please explain.
>
unfortunately, the udiffs of the webrev look different in quite some parts to
what you see when you look at the commit on the hg web server
(http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/ba51515b64e5),
On 25/01/2019 08:01, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
Hi Christoph,
This is a big change, and it seems a lot more changed than resolving
Hunks.
The support for zip files located in file systems created by custom
providers was essentially a new feature in JDK 12 so it may not have got
a lot of usage
Hi Christoph,
This is a big change, and it seems a lot more changed than resolving
Hunks. Some hunks are missing altogether.
For example,
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/ba51515b64e5,
ZipFileSystem 2341
2.341-IndexNode inode = new IndexNode(cen, nlen, pos);
2.342+
