On 2010-01-11 14:01, Ray Chen wrote:
Hi all,
For javax.swing.text.html.HTMLDocument_Reader_ActionsTest (1 failure
and 1 error)
I compared two swing.jar of trunk and java6, the only difference
between them is that java6 added some new classes:
javax\swing\event\RowSorterEvent$Type.class
javax\swing\event\RowSorterEvent.class
javax\swing\event\RowSorterListener.class
javax\swing\filechooser\FileNameExtensionFilter.class
javax\swing\RowSorter$SortKey.class
javax\swing\RowSorter.class
javax\swing\SortOrder.class
I think these classes are not related to this test. However, even
after I removed these new added classes or replaced trunk's swing.jar
with java6's swing.jar and run the test on the modified trunk , the
test still failed.
And trunk's swing.jar works well in both trunk and java6 to run this test.
So I am a little confused, same classes, same vm, why different result?
One more thing, although java6 only added a few classes in swing
module, the swing.jar is much bigger than trunk's (java6 5.11MB and
trunk 2.38MB on my machine).
I also found that java6's boot folder is much bigger than trunk's,
about 11MB bigger.
Did we really add "11MB" new features, or there is something wrong?
I think java6 is missing <property name="hy.jar.compress" value="true" /> in
make/properties.xml, so all the jars are not compressed.
I propose to apply patch [1] to java6, that can significant reduce our build
size as Ray mentioned before.
[1]
Index: make/properties.xml
=====================================================================
--- make/properties.xml
+++ make/properties.xml
@@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
<property name="hy.javac.source" value="1.5" />
<property name="hy.javac.target" value="1.5" />
<property name="hy.javac.maxmem" value="384M" />
+ <property name="hy.jar.compress" value="true" />
<!-- Temporarily always include class file debug info -->
<condition property="hy.javac.debug" value="on" else="on">
--
Best Regards,
Regis.
