Hi Goetz,
> Patching the file myself really helped to see there are no real changes.
>
> For the missing patch of the constructor I understand it was only an arbitrary
> reordering of arguments you omitted. Thus the whole chunk disappeared.
> This makes sense, and in case someone downports the other change he
> should be able to cope with that.
Well, there were actually 3 failing hunks:
--- ZipFileSystem.java
+++ ZipFileSystem.java
@@ -316,8 +326,8 @@
IndexNode inode = getInode(path);
if (inode == null)
return null;
- e = new Entry(inode.name, inode.isdir); // pseudo directory
- e.method = METHOD_STORED; // STORED for dir
+ // pseudo directory, uses METHOD_STORED
+ e = new Entry(inode.name, inode.isdir, METHOD_STORED);
e.mtime = e.atime = e.ctime = zfsDefaultTimeStamp;
}
} finally {
This one just had to find its place -> it is included in my change (line 329 of
new file).
@@ -1087,8 +1061,9 @@
if (pos + CENHDR + nlen > limit) {
zerror("invalid CEN header (bad header size)");
}
- IndexNode inode = new IndexNode(cen, nlen, pos);
+ IndexNode inode = new IndexNode(cen, pos, nlen);
inodes.put(inode, inode);
+
// skip ext and comment
pos += (CENHDR + nlen + elen + clen);
}
This one was the reordering of arguments when calling the "IndexNode"
constructor itself.
@@ -1806,7 +1777,7 @@
}
// constructor for cenInit() (1) remove tailing '/' (2) pad leading '/'
- IndexNode(byte[] cen, int nlen, int pos) {
+ IndexNode(byte[] cen, int pos, int nlen) {
int noff = pos + CENHDR;
if (cen[noff + nlen - 1] == '/') {
isdir = true;
This one was the reordering of arguments of the "IndexNode" constructor itself.
I think it's better to also take over the reordering of arguments of the
constructor. Here's an updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8034802.11u.1/
The updates are in line 1054 and 1770 of the new ZipFileSystem.java.
Best regards
Christoh
