Am 14.10.11 01:06, schrieb Mike Skells:
Hi Patrick, David,
David - I tried your suggestions, and I agree it must be faster, but
it is in the noise of my test env. not very satisfactory
Patrick - Unfortunately Appendable doesn't provide all of the
interface that you need. All of the meth
Hi Patrick, David,
David - I tried your suggestions, and I agree it must be faster, but it is in
the noise of my test env. not very satisfactory
Patrick - Unfortunately Appendable doesn't provide all of the interface that
you need. All of the methods throw IOException and you cannot append
On 10/13/2011 09:55 AM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
Am 11.10.2011 19:49, schrieb Xueming Shen:
I don't know which one is better, I did a run on
private static boolean op1(int b) {
return (b >> 6) != -2;
}
private static boolean op2(int b) {
return (b & 0xc0) != 0x80;
}
Changeset: 01615d3e74ed
Author:mullan
Date: 2011-10-13 13:50 -0400
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/01615d3e74ed
6953295: Move few sun.security.{util, x509, pkcs} classes used by
keytool/jarsigner to another package
Reviewed-by: mchung
! make/sun/security/other/Make
Neil,
All builds complete with your patches (on top of the latest JDK8 TL
repo) from :
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ngmr/ojdk-243.1/webrev.01/
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ngmr/ojdk-243.2/webrev.00/
solaris_sparc_5.10-product
solaris_sparcv9_5.10-product
solaris_i586_5.10-product
solaris_x64
Am 11.10.2011 19:49, schrieb Xueming Shen:
I don't know which one is better, I did a run on
private static boolean op1(int b) {
return (b >> 6) != -2;
}
private static boolean op2(int b) {
return (b & 0xc0) != 0x80;
}
private static boolean op3(byte b) {
Changeset: 2b27e14a4c82
Author:vinnie
Date: 2011-10-13 12:00 +0100
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/2b27e14a4c82
7099228: Use a PKCS11 config attribute to control encoding of an EC point
Reviewed-by: valeriep, mullan
! src/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs11/Config.jav
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 14:03 +0100, Chris Hegarty wrote:
> I think I seen in a previous mail that you didn't have access to Solaris
> machines? I'll grab your patch, apply to a latest jdk8 TL repo and do
> some sanity builds on Solaris if you like?
>
> -Chris.
>
Hi Chris,
Thank you, that would
I think I seen in a previous mail that you didn't have access to Solaris
machines? I'll grab your patch, apply to a latest jdk8 TL repo and do
some sanity builds on Solaris if you like?
-Chris.
On 10/13/11 01:43 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
Neil Richards wrote:
:
Will there need to be two bug num
Neil Richards wrote:
:
Will there need to be two bug numbers for this: one for awt & one for
tl ?
I think one bugID is fine for this:
7100054: (porting) Native code should include fcntl.h and unistd.h
rather than sys/fcntl.h and sys/unistd.h
-Alan.
On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 15:11 +1000, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> On 13/10/2011 2:54 PM, Charles Lee wrote:
> > Thanks Alan. Below is the patch I am failed to attach. It is trivial...
>
> Do you need someone to sponsor this for you, or are you able to drive
> this via other IBM folk that
On 10/13/2011 01:11 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Charles,
On 13/10/2011 2:54 PM, Charles Lee wrote:
Thanks Alan. Below is the patch I am failed to attach. It is trivial...
Do you need someone to sponsor this for you, or are you able to drive
this via other IBM folk that can generate webrevs on
12 matches
Mail list logo
