Re: RFR 8168091: jlink should check security permission early when programmatic access is used

2016-10-17 Thread Sundararajan Athijegannathan
Hi, Thanks for your review. I've updated webrev with jdk.tools.jlink -> jdk.tools.jlink.internal refactoring. But, when I attempted to get rid of shell script in the test with your suggestion, I got: Exception in thread "main" java.security.AccessControlException: access denied

Re: RFR 8168091: jlink should check security permission early when programmatic access is used

2016-10-17 Thread Mandy Chung
> On Oct 17, 2016, at 10:23 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan > wrote: > > Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8168091/webrev.00/ for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168091 The shell test can be removed and use @run

Re: module-info hygiene

2016-10-17 Thread Robert Scholte
On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 12:59:25 +0200, Alan Bateman wrote: On 17/10/2016 08:32, Peter Levart wrote: : Do we need an --exclude-modules (in addition to --add-modules) option on javac, java and jlink commands? --exclude-modules would be different to --limit-modules.

Re: Review Request: JDK-8167558 Add new JMOD section for header files and man pages

2016-10-17 Thread Mandy Chung
Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8167558/webrev.01/ This updates the exclude-jmod-section plugin not to filter specific modules. Also clean up DefaultImageBuilder further and improve the exception message when it detects duplicated resource entries. Mandy >

Re: module-info hygiene

2016-10-17 Thread Robert Scholte
I didn't had dead code in mind. And as Remi explained it cannot be detected on a jar-base, only on an application base. (which reminds me that we also need to have a look at the minimizeJar option of the maven-shade-plugin). My idea was more about collecting all classes required to compile

Re: RFR 8168091: jlink should check security permission early when programmatic access is used

2016-10-17 Thread Jim Laskey (Oracle)
+1 > On Oct 17, 2016, at 2:23 PM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan > wrote: > > Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8168091/webrev.00/ for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168091 > > Thanks, > > -Sundar >

RFR 8168091: jlink should check security permission early when programmatic access is used

2016-10-17 Thread Sundararajan Athijegannathan
Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8168091/webrev.00/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168091 Thanks, -Sundar

Re: Ugly things done to support multiple ContentHandlerFactory and URLStreamHandlerFactory

2016-10-17 Thread Chris Hegarty
Alan, Tom, On 13/10/16 19:59, Alan Bateman wrote: .. Speaking of net-dev, then maybe this thread should move there as this topic is really more of a URL issue rather than module system issue. I have replied to this over on net-dev [1] ( I hope that is ok ). We can continue the discussion

Re: module-info hygiene

2016-10-17 Thread Remi Forax
The compiler can not detect dead code because it can be a library. jlink can detect dead code and provide a list of unneeded modules because it has the view of the whole application. Rémi On October 17, 2016 10:45:26 AM GMT+02:00, Andrew Haley wrote: >On 16/10/16 19:52,

Re: module-info hygiene

2016-10-17 Thread Alan Bateman
On 17/10/2016 08:32, Peter Levart wrote: : Do we need an --exclude-modules (in addition to --add-modules) option on javac, java and jlink commands? --exclude-modules would be different to --limit-modules. If some module requires module M and there is no module M on the module path or it

Re: module-info hygiene

2016-10-17 Thread Andrew Haley
On 16/10/16 19:52, Robert Scholte wrote: > To enforce the discipline, the java compiler should IMHO at least > check if all required modules are indeed required and if the > transitive required modules are indeed transitive. How can the compiler possibly know this? There are ways of requiring a

Re: module-info hygiene

2016-10-17 Thread Peter Levart
Hi Robert, On 10/16/2016 08:52 PM, Robert Scholte wrote: Hi, with the introduction of the module-info something interesting is happening. Up until now the scope of a Java project was limited to the compilation of the classes. In case of Maven the end-user was in full control regarding the

Re: RFR: 8159523. Fix tests depending on absence of -limitmods in VM arguments.

2016-10-17 Thread Alan Bateman
On 14/10/2016 23:26, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: Could you please take another look? I have added more options, and fixed other things you have pointed out. I have also picked up a couple more tests to cover the newly added methods.