The jdk part of the fix looks good.
Thanks,
Alexandr.
On 1/13/2015 10:43 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 1/13/2015 11:30 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 21:51, Alan Bateman wrote:
I think this looks okay. I see Mandy's comment about dropping the
dependency on sun.security.util and th
On 1/13/2015 11:30 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 21:51, Alan Bateman wrote:
I think this looks okay. I see Mandy's comment about dropping the
dependency on sun.security.util and that would be good to do (but can
be another patch if you want).
ok. The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk
On 13.01.2015 21:51, Alan Bateman wrote:
I think this looks okay. I see Mandy's comment about dropping the
dependency on sun.security.util and that would be good to do (but can
be another patch if you want).
ok. The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.05/jdk
http://cr.
On 13/01/2015 15:45, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 17:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
Typo in my mail, I meant verify-modules.
They are currently issues with verify-modules and boot cycle builds
so I think verify-modules is currently disabled (at least in
jdk9/dev). Erik is working on this via
On 1/13/15 9:34 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 20:26, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 1/13/15 7:45 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 17:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
Typo in my mail, I meant verify-modules.
They are currently issues with verify-modules and boot cycle builds
so I think verif
On 13.01.2015 20:26, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 1/13/15 7:45 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 17:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
Typo in my mail, I meant verify-modules.
They are currently issues with verify-modules and boot cycle builds
so I think verify-modules is currently disabled (at least in
On 1/13/15 7:45 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 17:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
Typo in my mail, I meant verify-modules.
They are currently issues with verify-modules and boot cycle builds
so I think verify-modules is currently disabled (at least in
jdk9/dev). Erik is working on this via
On 13.01.2015 17:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
Typo in my mail, I meant verify-modules.
They are currently issues with verify-modules and boot cycle builds so
I think verify-modules is currently disabled (at least in jdk9/dev).
Erik is working on this via JDK-8067479.
The new versions:
http://cr.op
On 13/01/2015 14:17, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 13.01.2015 17:05, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/01/2015 13:52, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Yes it is unnecessary. The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.03/jdk
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.03/root
This looks go
On 13.01.2015 17:05, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/01/2015 13:52, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Yes it is unnecessary. The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.03/jdk
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.03/root
This looks good to (and I assume that "make verify-images"
On 13/01/2015 13:52, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Yes it is unnecessary. The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.03/jdk
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.03/root
This looks good to (and I assume that "make verify-images" passes).
-Alan.
On 13.01.2015 16:15, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 13/01/2015 11:40, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
:
The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.02/jdk
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.02/root
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8056298
Thanks for the update. T
On 13/01/2015 11:40, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
:
The new versions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.02/jdk
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.02/root
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8056298
Thanks for the update. The only thing that isn't clear to me is th
The makefile change looks good to me.
/Erik
On 2015-01-13 12:40, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hi, Alan.
On 12.01.2015 23:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
Thanks for doing this. I think it looks okay except for modules.xml
where it looks like there may be a few issues.
1. You've updated the definition of ja
Hi, Alan.
On 12.01.2015 23:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
Thanks for doing this. I think it looks okay except for modules.xml
where it looks like there may be a few issues.
1. You've updated the definition of java.corba to depend on
java.datatransfer but I don't think this is needed (is there code in
On 12/01/2015 20:50, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 12.01.2015 23:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 12/01/2015 20:29, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello.
Please review a fix for jdk 9.
In the fix a sun.datatransfer and a java.awt.datatransfer packages
were moved to the separate module java.datatransfer.
But sun
On 12.01.2015 23:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 12/01/2015 20:29, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello.
Please review a fix for jdk 9.
In the fix a sun.datatransfer and a java.awt.datatransfer packages
were moved to the separate module java.datatransfer.
But sun.awt.datatransfer still located in java.deskt
On 12/01/2015 20:29, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello.
Please review a fix for jdk 9.
In the fix a sun.datatransfer and a java.awt.datatransfer packages
were moved to the separate module java.datatransfer.
But sun.awt.datatransfer still located in java.desktop. I tested full
jdk(all modules include
Hello.
Please review a fix for jdk 9.
In the fix a sun.datatransfer and a java.awt.datatransfer packages were
moved to the separate module java.datatransfer.
But sun.awt.datatransfer still located in java.desktop. I tested full
jdk(all modules included) on osx using a jck, and it works without
19 matches
Mail list logo
