Created an issue and attached the patch so it doesn't get lost.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8029629
Roger
On 12/5/2013 3:12 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
I understand y'all luhv stability, but ... it's ONLY A TEST!
Also, there's Martin's 4th Law of Software Development:
Developers m
On 05/12/2013 19:42, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 5 Dec 2013, at 19:18, Martin Buchholz wrote:
You guys are way too trigger-happy.
I guess the reason for this is that there was a deadline today to get changes
into tl before the b120 snapshot. This is one of the final chances to get
non-showstoppe
> On 5 Dec 2013, at 19:18, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
> You guys are way too trigger-happy.
I guess the reason for this is that there was a deadline today to get changes
into tl before the b120 snapshot. This is one of the final chances to get
non-showstopper changes into JDK 8.
Your patch wil
On 05/12/2013 14:19, Rob McKenna wrote:
This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was
looking at it from completely the wrong direction. He contributed the
following fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8029525/webrev.01/
This is to avoid a race between:
thread.interrupt(
On 5 Dec 2013, at 14:40, roger riggs wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Looks fine. (Not a Reviewer).
+1. Looks ok to me too.
-Chris.
>
> Thanks for doing the legwork, Roger
>
> On 12/5/2013 9:19 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
>> This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was looking at
>> it
Hi Rob,
Looks fine. (Not a Reviewer).
Thanks for doing the legwork, Roger
On 12/5/2013 9:19 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was
looking at it from completely the wrong direction. He contributed the
following fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.ne
This failure cropped up again and Roger Riggs spotted that I was looking
at it from completely the wrong direction. He contributed the following fix:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8029525/webrev.01/
This is to avoid a race between:
thread.interrupt();
p.destroy();
Hoping to get this review
