The review for the original fix was actually on awt-dev which probably
was correct
and so this should be there too.
I hadn't seen the thread so had to go read it .. but it was so long ago I'd
probably have had to re-read it anyway. But it was not so easy to find
since it did not have the bug ID in the subject !
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-March/010742.html
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-April/010996.html
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-May/011370.html
Since it is changed, yes, being able to point to this review thread is
likely
something the 8u-dev maintainers would ask you for.
It looks OK to me although I don't grok why the order here in 8u
302 if (isXCompositeDisplay(awt_display, adata->awt_visInfo.screen) &&
303 hasXCompositeOverlayExtension(awt_display))
is reversed from what you had in 9 : 309 if
(hasXCompositeOverlayExtension(awt_display) &&
310 isXCompositeDisplay(awt_display, adata->awt_visInfo.screen)) which
looks more logical to me.
-phil.
On 07/18/2018 04:06 AM, Mario Torre wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to backport the fix for:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150954
To OpenJDK8 updates dev:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev
The fix is mostly the same as the version that was committed in 9,
with the exception of the GTK path which is not available in 8.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8150954/webrev-jdk8u.00/
I'm not sure if this change needs a re-review from the 2d team, as I
think is trivial, but I would like some feedback nonetheless before
proposing to the updates mailing list, especially in regards to
testing the patch on some OS variant without the necessary libraries.
Cheers,
Mario
