Everything is fine now. Thanks, Max
> On Mar 5, 2019, at 4:11 AM, Sean Mullan <[email protected]> wrote: > > Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mullan/webrevs/8217878/webrev.01/ > > Changes: > > - Added DOMCryptoBinary.java > - Changed Base64 calls to XMLUtils in DOMKeyValue, DOMPGPData, DOMReference, > DOMSignedInfo, DOMX509Data, and DOMXMLSignature > > Thanks, > Sean > > On 3/4/19 8:33 AM, Sean Mullan wrote: >> On 3/3/19 10:32 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >>> Two questions: >>> >>> 1. There is no DOMCryptoBinary.java. Maybe you forgot "hg add"? >> Yes, I did. I will add it. >>> 2. The Base64 class is called directly in several places. Aren't the helper >>> methods in XMLUtils enough? >> Good catch, since that code is not using XMLUtils, it is not checking the >> linebreaks property to see if linebreaks should be inserted >> (com.sun.org.apache.xml.internal.security.ignoreLineBreaks). Let me fix that >> to use XMLUtils and I'll follow up with another webrev. >> Thanks, >> Sean >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Max >>> >>>> On Feb 26, 2019, at 4:46 AM, Sean Mullan <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> In JDK 11, we included an updated version of Apache Santuario (which the >>>> JDK XML Signature implementation is based on) [1]. This contained a newer >>>> XML marshalling implementation, which has caused a couple of serious >>>> regressions (this one and JDK-8218629 [2]). >>>> >>>> After unsuccessfully trying to patch the current implementation, we >>>> decided to back it out and restore the previous code, which had been very >>>> stable for many years. The newer implementation is different in subtle >>>> ways and doesn't really offer any advantages other than a bit of reduction >>>> in lines of code. The Apache Santuario Project also has backed out the >>>> implementation. >>>> >>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mullan/webrevs/8217878/webrev.00/ >>>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8217878 >>>> >>>> New test cases have also been added for the regressions. >>>> >>>> Note that this also fixes JDK-8218629 [2]. Since technically they are >>>> different issues, I will probably include both bug-ids in this changeset. >>>> >>>> --Sean >>>> >>>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177334 >>>> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8218629 >>>
