On Thu, 9 Jun 2022 22:54:20 GMT, Hai-May Chao wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/CryptoPolicyParser.java line 202:
>>
>>> 200: if (!processedPermissions.isEmpty()) {
>>> 201: throw new ParsingException(st.lineno(), "Inconsistent
>>> policy");
>>> 202:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 20:52:33 GMT, Hai-May Chao wrote:
>> Please review a small fix in CryptoPolicyParser class that it should not
>> pass “processedPermissions” parameter by value.
>> Ran MACH5 tier1 and tier2 without failures.
>
> Hai-May Chao has updated the pull request incrementally with two
On Thu, 9 Jun 2022 21:00:55 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Hai-May Chao has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Inconsistent entries test
>> - Inconsistent entries test
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/CryptoPolicyPars
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 20:52:33 GMT, Hai-May Chao wrote:
>> Please review a small fix in CryptoPolicyParser class that it should not
>> pass “processedPermissions” parameter by value.
>> Ran MACH5 tier1 and tier2 without failures.
>
> Hai-May Chao has updated the pull request incrementally with two
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 20:52:33 GMT, Hai-May Chao wrote:
>> Please review a small fix in CryptoPolicyParser class that it should not
>> pass “processedPermissions” parameter by value.
>> Ran MACH5 tier1 and tier2 without failures.
>
> Hai-May Chao has updated the pull request incrementally with two
> Please review a small fix in CryptoPolicyParser class that it should not pass
> “processedPermissions” parameter by value.
> Ran MACH5 tier1 and tier2 without failures.
Hai-May Chao has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- Inconsistent
