Thanks all. I created sun bug 7193463 to track the code change.
Best regards,
Frank
On 8/22/2012 10:13 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 22/08/2012 12:11 PM, Frank Ding wrote:
Hi Alan and David,
So is it OK to commit the patch in Terminator class? I think Neil will
continue proposing the change in
On 23/08/2012 6:05 PM, Frank Ding wrote:
Thanks all. I created sun bug 7193463 to track the code change.
We already have 7189865 for this.
David
Best regards,
Frank
On 8/22/2012 10:13 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 22/08/2012 12:11 PM, Frank Ding wrote:
Hi Alan and David,
So is it OK to
Changeset: e7b53fe85540
Author:dingxmin
Date: 2012-08-23 16:28 +0800
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/e7b53fe85540
7193463: Improve registering signal handlers in java.lang.Terminator.setup()
Reviewed-by: dholmes, alanb
!
Hi David,
Sorry that Jonathan has already committed the code with bug id
7193463. Could you please dup the 2 bugs?
Best regards,
Frank
On 8/23/2012 4:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 23/08/2012 6:05 PM, Frank Ding wrote:
Thanks all. I created sun bug 7193463 to track the code change.
We
On 23/08/2012 6:37 PM, Frank Ding wrote:
Hi David,
Sorry that Jonathan has already committed the code with bug id 7193463.
Could you please dup the 2 bugs?
Alan has already taken care of it.
David
Best regards,
Frank
On 8/23/2012 4:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 23/08/2012 6:05 PM, Frank
Changeset: de5a85353f4d
Author:alanb
Date: 2012-08-23 13:07 +0100
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/de5a85353f4d
7191587: (se) SelectionKey.interestOps does not defer changing the interest set
to the next select [macosx]
Reviewed-by: alanb
Contributed-by: Jason T
Hopefully some day we would have fixed:
Bug 6373386 http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6373386 - Method chaining for
instance methods that return void
That would prevent us from such bloated sub classes.
Hopefully such workarounds would not force later incompatibilities
-Ulf
This change is to bring the jdk modularization changes from jigsaw repo [1]
to jdk8. This allows the jdk modularization changes to be exposed for
testing as early as possible and minimize the amount of changes carried
in the jigsaw repo that helps sync up jigsaw with jdk8/jdk9.
Webrev at:
On 23/08/2012 18:43, Mandy Chung wrote:
This change is to bring the jdk modularization changes from jigsaw
repo [1]
to jdk8. This allows the jdk modularization changes to be exposed for
testing as early as possible and minimize the amount of changes carried
in the jigsaw repo that helps sync
On 8/23/2012 11:58 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 23/08/2012 18:43, Mandy Chung wrote:
This change is to bring the jdk modularization changes from jigsaw
repo [1]
to jdk8. This allows the jdk modularization changes to be exposed for
testing as early as possible and minimize the amount of changes
Mandy,
It looks good.
Just a question below.
|| *src/share/classes/java/lang/management/ManagementFactory.java*
596 String intfName = mxbeanInterface.getName();
599 is not an instance of + mxbeanInterface);
Did you want this?:
596 String intfName
On 8/23/2012 12:48 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Mandy,
It looks good.
Thanks.
Just a question below.
|| *src/share/classes/java/lang/management/ManagementFactory.java*
596 String intfName = mxbeanInterface.getName();
599 is not an instance of +
On 23/08/2012 20:33, Mandy Chung wrote:
:
Done. This is a good cleanup I considered to do too but missed in the
previous webrev.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8/webrevs/7193339/webrev.01/
Thanks for the review.
Mandy
That looks much better, so looks good to me.
-Alan
Mandy,
1. You replace null with getClassLoader() calls in couple of places.
getClassLoader requires special permissions -
RuntimePermission(getClassLoader)
so probably you need to use doPrivileget() there.
Did you test your changes with SecurityManager/No permissions
for the test
Please review the fix of CR 7193406 at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7193406/webrev/.
It cleans up warnings in the following java files.
src/share/classes/java/io/FilePermission.java
src/share/classes/java/util/ArrayDeque.java
src/share/classes/java/util/Arrays.java
Looks good.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 8/23/12 12:33 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
On 8/23/2012 11:58 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 23/08/2012 18:43, Mandy Chung wrote:
This change is to bring the jdk modularization changes from jigsaw
repo [1]
to jdk8. This allows the jdk modularization changes to be
- Original Message -
Please review the fix of CR 7193406 at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7193406/webrev/.
snip...
And it enables fatal warning flag in the following make file.
make/java/jar/Makefile
Please don't do this, at least not unconditionally.
At the very
Hi fuyou001,
if you're using RMI in a J2SE project and it is OK, but it isn't
when you use the web project, then I suggest you look at the Jetty/Resin
implementation as it may be the culprit. Specifically, I'd look at the
ClassLoader in use. See this URL
- Original Message -
- Original Message -
Please review the fix of CR 7193406 at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7193406/webrev/.
snip...
And it enables fatal warning flag in the following make file.
make/java/jar/Makefile
Please don't do this,
Hi Mandy,
While I understand what you are doing and that it works it is far from
obvious upon code inspection that where you replace null with
Foo.class.getClassLoader(), that the result would always be null.
Another way to simplify this would be to add a new overload of
Class.forName():
On 8/23/12 5:12 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
Dan Xu wrote:
Please review the fix of CR 7193406 at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7193406/webrev/.
And it enables fatal warning flag in the following make file.
make/java/jar/Makefile
Please don't do this, at least not unconditionally.
Hi Dan,
On 24/08/2012 7:46 AM, Dan Xu wrote:
Please review the fix of CR 7193406 at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dxu/7193406/webrev/.
It cleans up warnings in the following java files.
src/share/classes/java/io/FilePermission.java
I'm surprised that you need this:
426
I was thinking about the same.
But a CCC request is needed for such a change in public API.
It can be done separately if any other API changes are necessary.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 8/23/12 6:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Mandy,
While I understand what you are doing and that it works it is far
23 matches
Mail list logo
