Re: RFR: 8158670: Fix @modules in java/lang/SecurityManager/CheckSecurityProvider.java

, Valerie Peng <valerie.p...@oracle.com> wrote: Changes look fine to me. Thanks, Valerie On 7/5/2016 2:31 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: On Jul 5, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline <alexandre.il...@oracle.com> wrote: On Jul 5, 2016, at 1:36 PM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@or

Re: RFR: 8158670: Fix @modules in java/lang/SecurityManager/CheckSecurityProvider.java

Changes look fine to me. Thanks, Valerie On 7/5/2016 2:31 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: On Jul 5, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: On Jul 5, 2016, at 1:36 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: On Jul 5, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Alexandre (Shura)

Re: RFR: 8158670: Fix @modules in java/lang/SecurityManager/CheckSecurityProvider.java

but rather an enhancement for the test to handle different images. Just my .02, Valerie On 6/29/2016 10:22 AM, Alexandre (Shura) Iline wrote: On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:22 PM, Valerie Peng <valerie.p...@oracle.com> wrote: One of the purpose of this test is to test the ordering (see the initial bug

Re: RFR: 8158670: Fix @modules in java/lang/SecurityManager/CheckSecurityProvider.java

One of the purpose of this test is to test the ordering (see the initial bug which this test is for: JDK-6997010). The original test already detects the OS and will skip certain providers accordingly. Instead of splitting the test into multiple platform-specific tests, maybe we can keep the

Re: [9] RFR:8130360: Add tests to verify 3rd party security providers if they are in signed/unsigned modular JARs

the appropriate changes, e.g. don't use the term JCE, get rid of the signing, and simplify the directory structure if possible? Thanks, Valerie On 12/8/2015 2:04 PM, Valerie Peng wrote: Right, that'd be my expectation as well. Sounds like everything works. I will change to look at your latest webrev

Re: [9] RFR:8130360: Add tests to verify 3rd party security providers if they are in signed/unsigned modular JARs

Siba, I have just started to review this webrev and not done yet. As for your question, the java.security file in OpenJDK9 still uses the provider class names instead of provider names. Are you talking about the java.security file in Jigsaw? Which build (OpenJDK or Jigsaw) have you tested