On 10/25/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok - I committed the change to DRLVM, but asked that you take the change to the classlib unit test and create a new JIRA so it's less confusing, because the fix to to the unit test wasn't related to the setMaxPrio bug
HARMONY-1955 has been created reporting classlib ThreadGroupTest failures on drlvm. geir
Elena Semukhina wrote: > > On 10/24/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Just to be clear - does J9 exhibit the same problem as the RI? > > > Yes, it does. The test passes on J9. > > > Elena Semukhina wrote: > > I attached two new patches to HARMONY-1625 which fix the test and > copy RI > > bug to drlvm ThreadGroup implementation :( > > Please review and commit! > > > > > > On 10/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> > >> Agreed. Lets match J9 and RI for now. We can always revisit as > it will > >> be logged, right? :) > >> > >> Elena Semukhina wrote: > >> > As everyone keeps silence, I'd suggest to change > implementation to be > >> bug > >> > compatible with RI. > >> > > >> > On 10/15/06, Elena Semukhina <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 10/14/06, Tim Ellison < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Elena Semukhina wrote: > >> >> > > Classlib test ThreadGroupTest.test_setMaxPriorityI () > fails on > >> DRLVM > >> >> > because > >> >> > > it expects behaviour that conflicts with specification. > >> >> > > The test passes on IBM VME and RI. The issue is reported at > >> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1625 . > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Actually there is a bug report in > >> >> > > > http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4708197 which > >> >> > agreed > >> >> > > that > >> >> > > this is a bug in RI and it should be fixed. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Should we follow RI's behaviour and change drlvm > >> ThreadGroup.javaor > >> >> > should > >> >> > > we fix the test? > >> >> > > >> >> > I'm off-line at the moment so cannot look at the bug > details. The > >> >> > question is whether fixing the 'bug' will likely break any > >> >> applications? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> This question was discussed in Sun's bug report as well. A > JCK test > >> >> detected this bug. The first evaluation stated that "This is > >> relatively > >> >> obscure functionality and it's theoretically possible at that > changing > >> >> the > >> >> behavior will break running apps." The second evaluation > suggested to > >> >> fix the implementation rather than change the spec. The bug is in > >> >> progress > >> >> since 2002... > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Regards, > >> >> > Tim > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > > >> >> > Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ) > >> >> > IBM Java technology centre, UK. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html > >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Thanks, > >> >> Elena > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > Thanks, > Elena
-- Thanks, Elena
