On 27/08/2018 12:25, Weijun Wang wrote:
Would it be possible (in the future) for 2 modules to use the same name for a
private package? If yes, we can dup the sun.security.action classes into
java.security.jgss without having to modify all calls.
Not if both modules are mapped to the same class
Would it be possible (in the future) for 2 modules to use the same name for a
private package? If yes, we can dup the sun.security.action classes into
java.security.jgss without having to modify all calls.
--Max
> On Aug 27, 2018, at 5:13 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
> On 13/08/2018 20:11, Sean
On 13/08/2018 20:11, Sean Mullan wrote:
:
Also, this change puts more of a dependency on sun.security.action
which I think we want to avoid, as it would be nice to eventually stop
exporting sun.security.action so as to minimize the exports from
java.base to the java.security.jgss module. You
On 8/14/18 1:04 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
On Aug 14, 2018, at 3:11 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
I think this should be an enhancement, and not a bug. Is this mainly for a
performance improvement?
Yes it's an enhancement.
Performance can be gained. Also, the privilegedGetProperty() method is alrea
Thanks for the update!
On 8/13/2018 11:39 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
Updated webrev at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8209416/webrev.01/
You can look at [1] to see what has changed. Mostly it's a case in other
security libs. I also change the calling style to put property name in the same
Updated webrev at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8209416/webrev.01/
You can look at [1] to see what has changed. Mostly it's a case in other
security libs. I also change the calling style to put property name in the same
line as the getProperty() call, and inline the name if it was define
> On Aug 14, 2018, at 3:11 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
>
> I think this should be an enhancement, and not a bug. Is this mainly for a
> performance improvement?
Yes it's an enhancement.
Performance can be gained. Also, the privilegedGetProperty() method is already
called in a lot of places. Usi
Good suggestion. I'll update my change.
Thanks
Max
> On Aug 13, 2018, at 9:53 PM, Roger Riggs wrote:
>
> Hi Max,
>
> It might be useful to be a bit more consistent about putting the property
> name on
> the same line as the privilegedGetProperty.
> It would help finding/grepping for the targe
It's nice to fix them if you'd like to.
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/13/2018 8:36 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
And several AccessController.doPrivileged(new GetBooleanAction()) calls.
If you'd like me to fix them as well, I can change the bug synopsis a little.
Thanks
Max
On Aug 13, 2018, at 11:33 PM, We
I think this should be an enhancement, and not a bug. Is this mainly for
a performance improvement?
Also, this change puts more of a dependency on sun.security.action which
I think we want to avoid, as it would be nice to eventually stop
exporting sun.security.action so as to minimize the expo
And several AccessController.doPrivileged(new GetBooleanAction()) calls.
If you'd like me to fix them as well, I can change the bug synopsis a little.
Thanks
Max
> On Aug 13, 2018, at 11:33 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Aug 13, 2018, at 10:00 PM, Xue-Lei Fan wrote:
>>
>> Looks fine t
> On Aug 13, 2018, at 10:00 PM, Xue-Lei Fan wrote:
>
> Looks fine to me.
>
> Did you notice other places that might need similar update as well in
> security components?
One "new GetPropertyAction()" at
String property = AccessController.doPrivileged(
new GetPropertyAction(
Looks fine to me.
Did you notice other places that might need similar update as well in
security components?
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/13/2018 3:24 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
Please take a review at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8209416/webrev.00/
This is all about refactoring "AccessContr
Hi Max,
It might be useful to be a bit more consistent about putting the
property name on
the same line as the privilegedGetProperty.
It would help finding/grepping for the targets of privileged actions.
For example, Grep would not find the one in
sun/security/krb5/Config.java:824-825 or
sun/s
14 matches
Mail list logo