Hi Severin,
On 7/19/19 9:55 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
There might be other tests with policy files where this is not the case.
My issue is with finding those tests :-/ If we know the set of *all*
tests affected by the breakage we could do approach 2. Approach 1 (or
3) seems safer.
Severin - how about a combination of the two approaches, meaning add
Docker.DOCKER_COMMAND as per the first version but use
privilegedGetProperty to read the value. That way only container tests
using a SM and their own policy files will need to grant the permission
to read this property.
Sure, fine with me. Here you go:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8228434/02/webrev/
It seems better to define Docker as a new top-level class as Platform
doesn't seem the right place to define DOCKER_COMMAND.
Otherwise looks good.
Mandy
