On 5/9/12 8:26 AM, Olivier Lagneau wrote:
Given that we want to push the code quickly, I don't think I should go for such
a large IE cleanup for this fix,
which is meant to provide better exceution speed only.
I suggest to follow Stuart's proposal first (i.e. reassert and return
immediately in m
On 10/05/2012 1:26 AM, Olivier Lagneau wrote:
I suggest to follow Stuart's proposal first (i.e. reassert and return
immediately in my code changes) ,
and create a dedicated new CR regarding proper handling of IE in all the
rmi tests (low priority).
Do you agree with this ?
Yes.
Thanks,
David
Changeset: 5152c832745a
Author:khazra
Date: 2012-05-09 16:55 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/5152c832745a
7096436: (sc) SocketChannel.connect fails on Windows 8 when channel configured
non-blocking
Summary: Set localAddress only when connection is established
Changeset: 6438f1277df6
Author:wetmore
Date: 2012-05-09 16:33 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/6438f1277df6
7167362: SecureRandom.init should be converted, amendment to 7084245
Reviewed-by: sherman
! src/share/classes/sun/security/provider/SecureRandom.java
Changeset: 59121a4c71c6
Author:khazra
Date: 2012-05-09 11:14 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/59121a4c71c6
7165118: (prefs) AbstractPreferences.remove(null) does not throw NPE
Summary: Insert null argument check in AbstractPreferences.remove()
Reviewed-by: dholm
Changeset: 5e8caf6984f5
Author:ksrini
Date: 2012-05-09 07:28 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/5e8caf6984f5
7166955: (pack200) JNI_GetCreatedJavaVMs needs additional checking
Reviewed-by: alanb, dholmes, ksrini
Contributed-by: youd...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
! src/sh
Hi Stuarts, David,
I agree with your arguments/points discussed below.
I understand the argument against swallowing or only reasserting the
interrupt when catching IE.
I have gone again quickly through all the rmi tests and don't think this
code takes into account interuption,
or intend to ma
On 5/8/2012 1:28 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 08/05/2012 04:14, David Holmes wrote:
I think it is clear that if there are no VMs then *nVMs is set to
zero and JNI_OK is returned.
I don't think it is clear and it should be made explicit in the spec.
BTW: Did you create a bug for the JNI spec w
