Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

+1 Really nice, thank you. > On Nov 15, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Denis Kononenko > wrote: > > > Hi, > > Please do re-review for these changes. > > 1) tests for list --include were rewritten accordingly to > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167384; > 2)

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, Please do re-review for these changes. 1) tests for list --include were rewritten accordingly to https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167384; 2) removed tests for '@filename', see https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169720; 3) two new CRs were submitted:

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi Andrey, No, it isn't. I submitted a new CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167384. Thank you, Denis. > Hi, > > Looks OK. Is it 100% pass rate? > > —Andrey > > On 9 Nov 2016, at 20:36, Denis Kononenko > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > After

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, Looks OK. Is it 100% pass rate? —Andrey > On 9 Nov 2016, at 20:36, Denis Kononenko wrote: > > > > Hi, > > After discussion with Andrey we decided to add more tests for corner cases. > The new changes are available by the link below. > > WEBREV:

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, After discussion with Andrey we decided to add more tests for corner cases. The new changes are available by the link below. WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dkononenko/8167240/webrev.03/ BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167240 Thank you, Denis. > Hi, > > Looks OK

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, Looks OK to me. I can suggest two more cases. A directory and file symlink can be passed in options where tool requires a file path. —Andrey > On 8 Nov 2016, at 16:17, Denis Kononenko wrote: > > > Hi, > > The new version of changes. > > - Switched back to

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, The new version of changes. - Switched back to jdk/test/testlibrary to avoid unwanted dependencies (JImageToolTest.java); - Verified tests on smallest possible JDK build. WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dkononenko/8167240/webrev.02/ BUGURL:

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Denis, I can see that you have switched to the top level test library with this change. With that you are getting more module dependencies than just java.base. First of all, it would probably make sense to build only the classes you needed (which would be jdk.test.lib.process.ProcessTools, I

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Nice work. +1 > On Nov 3, 2016, at 10:29 AM, Denis Kononenko > wrote: > > Hi, > > I've done some rework accordingly to Alan's and Shura's comments: > > 1) removed overlapped tests from JImageToolTest.java; > > 2) added new tests JImageVerifyTest.java for jimage

[9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, I've done some rework accordingly to Alan's and Shura's comments: 1) removed overlapped tests from JImageToolTest.java; 2) added new tests JImageVerifyTest.java for jimage verify; 3) reorganized jtreg's tags; The new WEBREV can be found here:

Re: [9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, Denis, By an agreement, @modules should go before any action tag. You use it after @build. Shura > On Oct 6, 2016, at 9:37 AM, Denis Kononenko > wrote: > > Hi, > > Could someone please review these new tests for jimage utility. > > There're 5 new files

[9] RFR: 8167240: Write new tests to cover functionality of existing 'jimage' options

Hi, Could someone please review these new tests for jimage utility. There're 5 new files containing tests to cover use cases for 'info', 'list', 'extract' and other options. No new tests for 'verify'. BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167240 WEBREV: