Re: RFR: 8193211 : Update jtreg TEST.groups and ProblemList for client-libs

2017-12-07 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
Hi Phil, jdk/internal/util \ has already removed by task https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8192958 . I think better to use group name "jdk_client_sanity" instead of "sanity/client/SwingSet \" at line no:358. Typo " commuonly" at line no: 355. Regards, Muneer -Original Message-

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8190456: sanity/client/SwingSet/src/ComboBoxDemoTest.java failed with NPE from java.awt.EventQueue.getCurrentEventImpl()

2017-11-07 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
: Friday, November 03, 2017 11:49 AM To: Muneer Kolarkunnu; awt-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: [10] RFR JDK-8190456: sanity/client/SwingSet/src/ComboBoxDemoTest.java failed with NPE from java.awt.EventQueue.getCurrentEventImpl() Hi Muneer, Earlier, before your fix, if Thread.currentThread

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8190456: sanity/client/SwingSet/src/ComboBoxDemoTest.java failed with NPE from java.awt.EventQueue.getCurrentEventImpl()

2017-11-02 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
, November 02, 2017 1:07 AM To: Muneer Kolarkunnu; awt-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: [10] RFR JDK-8190456: sanity/client/SwingSet/src/ComboBoxDemoTest.java failed with NPE from java.awt.EventQueue.getCurrentEventImpl() Hi, Can you please clarify how to run this test. On my system it always fails

[10] RFR JDK-8190456: sanity/client/SwingSet/src/ComboBoxDemoTest.java failed with NPE from java.awt.EventQueue.getCurrentEventImpl()

2017-11-01 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
Hi All, Please review fix for the below bug: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190456 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akolarkunnu/8190456/webrev.00/ This issue observed during SBR(Same Binary Run) execution of client sanity tests. Same exception observed from test

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8177699:Some swing and awt tests are not in TEST.groups

2017-06-12 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
Hi Prasanta,   According to bug HYPERLINK "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180821%20,%0dtest%20case%20com/apple/laf/ScreenMenu/ScreenMenuMemoryLeakTest.java"https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180821 , HYPERLINK "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180821%20,%0dtest%20ca

Re: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2

2016-05-24 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
-Original Message- From: Mario Torre [mailto:neug...@redhat.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 4:51 PM To: Muneer Kolarkunnu Cc: Prasanta Sadhukhan; awt-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2 On Tue, May 24

Re: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2

2016-05-24 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
New webrev link : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8153184/webrev.01/ Regards, Muneer From: Muneer Kolarkunnu Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 4:12 PM To: Prasanta Sadhukhan; awt-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is

Re: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2

2016-05-24 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
Hi Prasanta, I raised ccc and it got approved: http://ccc.us.oracle.com/8153184 Added the label "noreg-doc" to bug report and removed the test case[It got added by mistake]. Regards, Muneer From: prasanta sadhukhan Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 12:24 PM To: Muneer Kolar

Re: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2

2016-05-16 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
Reminder! Regards, Muneer From: Muneer Kolarkunnu Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 5:19 PM To: awt-dev@openjdk.java.net Subject: Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2 Hi All, Please review the fix for bug 8153184

Review request for 8153184: BorderLayout javadoc says current version of JDK is 1.2

2016-05-12 Thread Muneer Kolarkunnu
Hi All, Please review the fix for bug 8153184, Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcm/8153184/webrev.00/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153184 Issue: It is a documentation bug, it is mentioning version information in the javad