Copyrights fixed in place. Thank you, Mandy.
Shura > On Jun 27, 2016, at 12:27 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: > > I’m including security-dev which would be a better list to review this test > fix. > > Valerie, > Does this test have to be order-sensitive? I think this test would be > cleaner to make it order-insensitive and simply test the security provider > initialization. > > See my comments below. > >> On Jun 27, 2016, at 8:21 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline >> <alexandre.il...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> Please take a look on a suggested for for the >> java/lang/SecurityManager/CheckSecurityProvider.java test. >> >> The test in question depend on a list of modules, some of them are >> platform-specific. Listing all the dependencies in one test is causing the >> test to be skipped on every platform. In an offline conversation it was >> decided that it is better to split this tests into a few tests to declare >> the per-platform module dependencies. >> >> The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8158670 >> The suggested fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8158670/webrev.00/ > > The copyright header start year of the new tests should be 2016. > > I would suggest to make CheckSecurityProvide a platform-neutral test, i.e., > - drop @requires > - make line 94-97 to ignore the platform-dependent provider if it’s present > in the white list > > If we could make this test order-insensitive, it’d be cleaner to maintain a > platform-neutral list of security providers and one list for the > platform-dependent security providers for each platform. Just an idea. > > Mandy >
