On 7/3/2012 11:09 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> Your fix looks fine.
>
Thanks!
> IMHO, the remind is not really useful unless you dump more info, say,
> the value of serverIn.remaining().
We can get the value from analysis of the log. The remind is only used
for the case that we do not really fix the
One minor thing:
Line 25 should be empty, this starts another paragraph on providers.
Thanks
Max
On 07/03/2012 01:34 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
Yep, looks good.
On 07/02/2012 11:59 AM, Tom Hawtin wrote:
Looks good.
Tom
On 02/07/2012 16:54, Jason Uh wrote:
Thanks for your comments.
Please see
Your fix looks fine.
IMHO, the remind is not really useful unless you dump more info, say,
the value of serverIn.remaining(). QE would report the failure to "THE
SECURITY TEAM" anyway.
-Max
On 07/03/2012 11:00 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 7/3/2012 10:40 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
No new test neede
On 7/3/2012 10:40 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> No new test needed. I only think that you might be able to hack the
> current test a little to reproduce this and see if the failure is the
> same and if your code change can fix it. There is no need to keep this
> hack in your final changeset.
>
I tied s
No new test needed. I only think that you might be able to hack the
current test a little to reproduce this and see if the failure is the
same and if your code change can fix it. There is no need to keep this
hack in your final changeset.
-Max
On 07/03/2012 10:37 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 7/
On 7/3/2012 10:02 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 07/03/2012 09:48 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> On 7/2/2012 4:35 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>> I take a look at the test output. When the last handshake starts:
>>>
>>>
>>> server unwrap: OK/NEED_TASK, 230/0 bytes
>>> running delegate
On 07/03/2012 09:48 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 7/2/2012 4:35 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
I take a look at the test output. When the last handshake starts:
server unwrap: OK/NEED_TASK, 230/0 bytes
running delegated task...
new HandshakeStatus: NEED_WRAP
server wrap: OK
On 7/2/2012 4:35 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I take a look at the test output. When the last handshake starts:
>
>
> server unwrap: OK/NEED_TASK, 230/0 bytes
> running delegated task...
> new HandshakeStatus: NEED_WRAP
>
> server wrap: OK/NEED_WRAP, 0/86 bytes
>
Changeset: b2fc66012451
Author:smarks
Date: 2012-07-02 14:11 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/b2fc66012451
7176907: additional warnings cleanup in java.util, java.util.regexp,
java.util.zip
Reviewed-by: forax, khazra, smarks
Contributed-by: Mani Sarkar
! src/
Changeset: ecc5dd3790a1
Author:robm
Date: 2012-07-02 19:32 +0100
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/ecc5dd3790a1
7174887: Deadlock in jndi ldap connection cleanup
Reviewed-by: xuelei
! src/share/classes/com/sun/jndi/ldap/Connection.java
! src/share/classes/com/sun/jndi
Yep, looks good.
On 07/02/2012 11:59 AM, Tom Hawtin wrote:
Looks good.
Tom
On 02/07/2012 16:54, Jason Uh wrote:
Thanks for your comments.
Please see updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/7133344/webrev.01
Jason
On 07/02/2012 08:45 AM, Tom Hawtin wrote:
On 02/07/2012 16:00, Jason
Looks good.
Tom
On 02/07/2012 16:54, Jason Uh wrote:
Thanks for your comments.
Please see updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/7133344/webrev.01
Jason
On 07/02/2012 08:45 AM, Tom Hawtin wrote:
On 02/07/2012 16:00, Jason Uh wrote:
This change is documentation for allowing a user
Thanks for your comments.
Please see updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/7133344/webrev.01
Jason
On 07/02/2012 08:45 AM, Tom Hawtin wrote:
On 02/07/2012 16:00, Jason Uh wrote:
This change is documentation for allowing a user to specify an alternate
java.security file.
Webrev: ht
On 02/07/2012 16:00, Jason Uh wrote:
This change is documentation for allowing a user to specify an alternate
java.security file.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/7133344/webrev.00/
CR: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7133344
+# An alternate java.security properties
On 07/02/2012 11:00 AM, Jason Uh wrote:
Hi all,
This change is documentation for allowing a user to specify an alternate
java.security file.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/7133344/webrev.00/
On line 13 and 20, add a "#" at the beginning of line to indicate it is
still a comment even
Hi all,
This change is documentation for allowing a user to specify an alternate
java.security file.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/7133344/webrev.00/
CR: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7133344
Thanks,
Jason
I take a look at the test output. When the last handshake starts:
server unwrap: OK/NEED_TASK, 230/0 bytes
running delegated task...
new HandshakeStatus: NEED_WRAP
server wrap: OK/NEED_WRAP, 0/86 bytes
Here the first wrap only generates 86 b
17 matches
Mail list logo
