On 03/11/2011 11:33 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Pavel Tisnovsky:
Does anyone know how to find out the original bug ID or push number to
OpenJDK7 repository please?
The fix was contained in the initial load, so a bug number may still
exist, but not a push number.
It may be 6599601 [1].
Che
Yes it is:
6599601: Permissions/AWTWindowTest and Permissions/DFLoadTest failed in PIT 7.0
B20 on Windows Vista
Use that bug number, and you have approval to putback to openjdk6.
This change was made before the Mercurial transition.
-kto
On May 9, 2011, at 7:36 AM, Omair Majid wrote:
> On 0
I'm not sure what to say here. It's part of hotspot, and will likely always be
part of hotspot going forward.
I understand the need to not have them, but I'm concerned that the files will
just keep coming back each time
the openjdk6 hotspot sources get upgraded.
Marking the tests @ignore might
On 08:38 Mon 09 May , Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what to say here. It's part of hotspot, and will likely always
> be part of hotspot going forward.
> I understand the need to not have them, but I'm concerned that the files will
> just keep coming back each time
> the openjdk6 hotsp
The tests could be guarded by a wrapper program that tested the platform
version and just vacuously passed on a JDK 6.
-Joe
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I'm not sure what to say here. It's part of hotspot, and will likely always be
part of hotspot going forward.
I understand the need to not have them,
Assuming that the -XX options used to start up the test don't cause issues,
that might work.
I assume you are suggesting adding something like this to the main() method:
if ( System.getProperty("java.version").startsWith("1.6") ) return;
??? Someone would need to experiment and see if that wor
Maybe the tests should dynamically detect if they are applicable to the
JRE being tested.
-- Jon
On 05/09/2011 08:38 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
I'm not sure what to say here. It's part of hotspot, and will likely always be
part of hotspot going forward.
I understand the need to not have them, bu
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> Assuming that the -XX options used to start up the test don't cause issues,
> that might work.
>
> I assume you are suggesting adding something like this to the main() method:
> if ( System.getProperty("java.version").startsWith("1.6") ) return;
>
> ??? Someone would need
On May 9, 2011, at 9:48 AM, Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
> Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>> Assuming that the -XX options used to start up the test don't cause issues,
>> that might work.
>>
>> I assume you are suggesting adding something like this to the main() method:
>> if ( System.getProperty("java.versio
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
Kelly O'Hair wrote:
Assuming that the -XX options used to start up the test don't cause issues,
that might work.
I assume you are suggesting adding something like this to the main() method:
if ( System.getProperty("java.version").startsWith("1.6") ) return;
??? Som
10 matches
Mail list logo
