Changeset: c63d61b941c3
Author:alanb
Date: 2016-01-14 10:47 +
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/jdk/rev/c63d61b941c3
Minor clean-up
! src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ClassLoader.java
! src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/module/ModuleDescriptor.java
!
On 01/14/2016 12:25 PM, e...@zusammenkunft.net wrote:
Hello,
If I understood it correctly the modules on the MP must be unique and are not
merged, thats why the order inside the directory does not matter for the named
modules.
Bernd
Let me refine that for you ...
The modules in each
Changeset: 129618f8a89b
Author:mchung
Date: 2016-01-14 10:53 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/jdk/rev/129618f8a89b
Minor cleanup on Class.forName
! src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Class.java
Hi,
on the maven-dev list I've received a couple of responses.
The following comments are worth mentioning:
Igor Fedorenko says: "This is a very good proposal. My only suggestion is
to extend javax.tools CompilationTask API to take modulepath map as
in-memory parameter. Not a big deal, but
On 01/14/2016 12:14 PM, Robert Scholte wrote:
Igor Fedorenko says: "This is a very good proposal. My only suggestion
is to extend javax.tools CompilationTask API to take modulepath map as
in-memory parameter. Not a big deal, but it'll be silly to write
properties file to disk for it to be
Changeset: 324b5108c069
Author:ctornqvi
Date: 2016-01-14 08:18 -0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jigsaw/jake/hotspot/rev/324b5108c069
8147396: [TESTBUG] Jigsaw issues with AppCDS tests - "error: package
sun.jvmstat.monitor does not exist
+ test/gc/metaspace/PerfCounter.java
+
Hello,
If I understood it correctly the modules on the MP must be unique and are not
merged, thats why the order inside the directory does not matter for the named
modules.
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net
-Original Message-
From: Robert Scholte
To:
I've heard rumblings about the need to make JVM/TI changes due to
JigSaw so it makes sense the change the JVM/TI version number at
the same time. As Alan mentioned, JVM/TI versions weren't tied
to JDK releases so changing the major version from '1' to '9'
could be done at this time if we feel
On 1/7/16 6:27 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 05/01/2016 23:34, Iris Clark wrote:
Hi, Alan.
JNI and JVM TI version numbers weren’t considered.
Updating the JNI version to drop the "1" similar to what we've done
for other parts of the system seems like an obvious change we should
make.
I'll