On 02/15/2017 11:04 PM, Seán Coffey wrote:
Hi Weijun,
That's looks good to me and will be a big help for keytool usability.
some thoughts :
Main.java : in your printCRL method, would you consider editing the
X509CRLImpl class to print with a customized string ? It'll make the
code more resil
OK.
Xuelei
> On Feb 16, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>
> The new kdc timeout policy test KdcPolicy.java [1] has been running for some
> time and it's both faster and more reliable. I request removing the old ones:
>
> files:
> - test/sun/security/krb5/auto/BadKdc.java
> -
Changes look fine.
Just a nit on code conventions, we normally use the style below:
try {
...
} catch (..) {
...
}
Can you update the test source to follow the same style?
Thanks,
Valerie
On 2/7/2017 11:50 AM, Adam Petcher wrote:
This change adds a test which executes example vectors from NIST
The new kdc timeout policy test KdcPolicy.java [1] has been running for
some time and it's both faster and more reliable. I request removing the
old ones:
files:
- test/sun/security/krb5/auto/BadKdc.java
- test/sun/security/krb5/auto/BadKdc1.java
- test/sun/security/krb5/auto/
Done!
On 02/16/2017 05:27 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
I think go with the first for now.
-Alan
On 16/02/2017 16:24, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
please review this simple backout of a startup optimization that has
proven to destabilize things like rmid. Patch inline..
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk
I think go with the first for now.
-Alan
On 16/02/2017 16:24, Claes Redestad wrote:
Hi,
please review this simple backout of a startup optimization that has
proven to destabilize things like rmid. Patch inline..
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175079
diff -r 87f2a6fb4b9a s
Hi,
please review this simple backout of a startup optimization that has
proven to destabilize things like rmid. Patch inline..
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175079
diff -r 87f2a6fb4b9a src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/System.java
--- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/l
On 02/14/2017 11:55 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
Hi Max,
I agree this change is necessary so that we can resolve this tck-red
issue before ZBB. However, since the TCK Policy provider implementation
is not a "typical" implementation in the sense that it is denying
permissions instead of granting perm
