Re: Request for approval to sync Feb 2013 CPU fixes into jdk6-open

Even better if you want to push the change ? I haven't heard from Andrew B. yet. I've logged 8009641 to track this. You could use that ID if you want. 8009641: OpenJDK 6 build broken via 8007675 fix regards, Sean. On 07/03/2013 13:51, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Message - Yes

Re: Request for approval to sync Feb 2013 CPU fixes into jdk6-open

Yes - you're right. That does look like an issue. Andrew Brygin ran pre integration tests before pushing the changes internally and they were successful. However - I've traced back over the sources and what was run in his test build and what he pushed to internal repo differs. ( in 2 areas) -

Re: Request for approval to sync Feb 2013 CPU fixes into jdk6-open

I'm only the proxy here but I created the webrev from the changesets that I pushed. I don't see any difference. t4 $diff LCMSTransform.java.webrev jdk/src/share/classes/sun/java2d/cmm/lcms/LCMSTransform.java t4 $ regards, Sean. On 07/03/2013 10:59, Andrew Hughes wrote: - Original Messag

Re: Request for approval to sync Feb 2013 CPU fixes into jdk6-open

February CPU pushes completed as reviewed in last round of webrevs. I'd like to push 2 extra fixes now for issues addressed in yesterday's JDK releases. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.6open.mar5/ Good to push ? regards, Sean. On 05/03/2013 18:44, Omair Majid wrote: On

RFR: 7199153 : TEST_BUG: try-with-resources syntax pushed to 6-open repo.

Looking for reviewer so I can push this change to jdk6 open repos. Recent testcases added to jdk6 open are not compiling since they're using try-with-resources and nio code only found in jdk7+. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.7199153/

Re: Request for review & push to 6open : 7174440 JDK6-open build breakage

It was more or less to change Sun -> Oracle. thanks for reviewing. regards, Sean. On 06/06/12 14:19, Andrew Hughes wrote: The code change looks ok from comparing the 6& 7 versions. I'm not sure why you're changing the copyright to 2012 when no changes have been made in 2012.

CR 7071826 - code review & push request

this is a port of jdk7u fix to the openjdk6 repo. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.7071826.jdk6/ 7u discussion/review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk7u-dev/2012-May/002990.html regards, Sean.

code review request for 7058133: Javah should use the freshly built classes instead of those from the BOOTDIR jdk

http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7058133 Already fixed in jdk8 and I'm hoping to push changes to 6-open and 7u once reviewed/approved. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.7058133/ regards, Sean.

Re: Request to backport 7102369/709446/7100592 and 7092186

Omair, Apologies for posting across your recent mail. I incorrectly assumed I was registered on the jdk6-dev alias. I didn't see your mail until I began seaching the archives. My recent mail "code review request : RegistryImpl clean up (7102369)" also seeks to address the registryImpl issues t

code review request : RegistryImpl clean up (7102369)

Some clean up of the RMI RegistryImpl class is necessary after late changes made in the last set of udpate releases. This is a webrev to bring the code into sync with 6uX, 7uX. The java.rmi.server.codebase property no longer needs to be parsed by the registryImpl. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.j

request to fix CR 6998583 for 6 open

Requesting approval to push 6998583 changes to 6-open. Already reviewed by Brad. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.6998583.6open/ regards, Sean.

request to fix CR 6963720 for 6 open

Hi, I'd like to push a simple change to 6 open for a typo correction. webrev :http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/6963720/webrev.6open.6963720/ regards, Sean.