On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 21:47:03 GMT, Weijun Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Please review this PR which updates the JarInputStream class description to
>> clarify when the Manifest is accessible via JarInputStream::getManifest and
>> JarInputStream::get[Jar]Entry.
>>
>> It is worth noting that with this update, we are finally documenting
>> behavior that dates back to when this class was added to JDK 1.2
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Lance
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/jar/JarInputStream.java line 62:
>
>> 60: * is the second jar entry
>> 61: * </li>
>> 62: * </ul>
>
> I wonder if it's necessary to duplicate these lines. How about something like
> "If ...., then getManifest() returns the manifest and the first call to
> getNextEntry() returns the entry after it".
The challenge I had with the wording is due to the fact that if "META-INF/" is
the first entry in the Zip file, it will not be returned regardless of whether
there is a manifest. So open to suggestions.
> Either say "verified" for both methods or none. Otherwise, it sounds like
> `getCertificates` might return unverified ones.
>
Fixed
> Also, you might want to mention:
>
> 1. If the content of an entry is modified after the file is signed,
> reading the entry will throw a SecurityException.
>
Added a note
> 2. These two methods return null if the file is not signed or the
> signature is not parseable.
Given I link to the javadoc for these methods, this I hope is enough as my goal
was not to replace the javadoc for the JarEntry methods. If you feel the
methods should be clarified, happy to work on that next
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/jar/JarInputStream.java line 75:
>
>> 73: * </li>
>> 74: * <li>
>> 75: * All signature entries must immediately follow the {@code
>> manifest}
>
> We normally say "signature-related entries", which contains both the
> signature files (.SF) and the signature block files (.DSA/.RSA/.EC) files.
Updated in the next push
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10045
