David, I did some research (archeology), the change that introduced this:
changeset: 2223:c7f3d0b4570f user: never date: Fri Mar 18 16:00:34 2011 -0700 summary: 7017732: move static fields into Class to prepare for perm ten removal None of the 6u I tried have the problem. Makes sense to me… /R On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:46 AM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: > David, > > I'll try to find the sources and see if I can find any obvious difference. > > I've considered adding a regression test, however I couldn't come up with an > idea that wouldn't > involve native libraries. I've seen a couple of "solutions" of native > libraries but none of them seem > especially practical. I'm considering asking SQE if they could add a test for > this… > > Thanks > /R > > On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:08 AM, David Holmes wrote: > >> Hi Rickard, >> >> On 29/08/2012 5:24 PM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: >>> can I get a couple of reviews for the following bug fix: >>> >>> http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7093328 >>> webrev: http://rbackman.se.oracle.com/~rbackman/7093328/ >> >> Finding the field in the class_mirror certainly seems correct. >> >> But the CR stated this used to work in 6u26, so I'm wondering what changed >> to cause this to break? >> >> Plus is it feasible to add a regression test for this? We don't seem to be >> covering this functionality otherwise. :( >> >> Thanks, >> David >
