On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 17:57:02 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>> In addition to the goals, scope, motivation, specification and requirement
>> notes in [JDK-8315487](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315487), we
>> would like to describe the most relevant decisions taken during the
>> implementatio
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 17:57:02 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>> In addition to the goals, scope, motivation, specification and requirement
>> notes in [JDK-8315487](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315487), we
>> would like to describe the most relevant decisions taken during the
>> implementatio
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 17:57:02 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>> In addition to the goals, scope, motivation, specification and requirement
>> notes in [JDK-8315487](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315487), we
>> would like to describe the most relevant decisions taken during the
>> implementatio
On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 20:41:04 GMT, Anthony Scarpino
wrote:
> > > It's only the combination of a Provider that overrides
> > > getService/getServices + does not call putService/put + overrides
> > > newInstance without calling its parent + uses a non-Java SE service type
> > > that would be unf
On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 07:18:02 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
> It's only the combination of a Provider that overrides getService/getServices
> + does not call putService/put + overrides newInstance without calling its
> parent + uses a non-Java SE service type that would be un
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 05:14:07 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
> It's only the combination of a Provider that overrides getService/getServices
> + does not call putService/put + overrides newInstance without calling its
> parent + uses a non-Java SE service type that would be unfilt
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:54:59 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>>> In rare situations, a third-party provider can override
>>> java.security.Provider.Service::newInstance and return an unvetted service
>>> implementation (SPI).
>>
>>
>> Well, there is a concern of mine. I don't agree the case is rare.
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 21:05:53 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
> getService/getServices API overrides are supported since the initial PR.
> Please check the JEP and implementation, and let us know if you see any flaw.
I guess you refer to the following section in the JEP. Otherwise, please let
me know
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:28:27 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>> In addition to the goals, scope, motivation, specification and requirement
>> notes in [JDK-8315487](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315487), we
>> would like to describe the most relevant decisions taken during the
>> implementatio
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 19:22:57 GMT, Francisco Ferrari Bihurriet
wrote:
> ... We agree that this pull request is too large to review ...
Thank you!
> ... Is not a goal of this proposal to allow different filter implementations
Got it. Thank you for the clarification. But, does it sound reason
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 18:30:50 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>> In addition to the goals, scope, motivation, specification and requirement
>> notes in [JDK-8315487](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315487), we
>> would like to describe the most relevant decisions taken during the
>> implementatio
On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 12:58:43 GMT, Matthew Donovan wrote:
> This PR removes javax/rmi/ssl/SSLSocketParametersTest.sh from the
> ProblemList. The script was removed in JDK-8298939 and the Java code
> refactored to be a jtreg test.
Marked as reviewed by xuelei (Reviewer).
-
PR Revie
On Fri, 12 May 2023 17:57:43 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> May I have this update reviewed?
>
> The sprintf is deprecated in Xcode 14, and Microsoft Virtual Studio, because
> of security concerns. The issue was addressed in
> [JDK-8296812](https://bugs.o
On Wed, 24 May 2023 19:20:09 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> May I have this update reviewed?
>>
>> The sprintf is deprecated in Xcode 14, and Microsoft Virtual Studio, because
>> of security concerns. The issue was addressed in
>> [JD
On Mon, 15 May 2023 17:21:14 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> The libnet changes look reasonable to me.
@dfuch Thank you for the review. This patch may be still too big as a few
components were involved. To easy to review process, I opened a new PR for
libnet update, and will reverse the libnet ch
d
> [JDK-8299378](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8299378)/[JDK-8299635](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8299635)/[JDK-8301132](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8301132)
> for testing issues . This is a break-down update for sprintf uses in the
> java.base module.
>
> T
Hi,
May I have this update reviewed?
The sprintf is deprecated in Xcode 14, and Microsoft Virtual Studio, because of
security concerns. The issue was addressed in
[JDK-8296812](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8296812) for building
failure, and
[JDK-8299378](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse
On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 21:49:07 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8293412
I think it is a good clean up so that the default one get used in testing.
-
Marked as reviewed by xuelei (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10716
On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:24:59 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/URL.java line 852:
>>
>>> 850: * @since 20
>>> 851: */
>>> 852: public static URL fromURI(URI uri, URLStreamHandler streamHandler)
>>
>> What do you think to have this method in URI inste
On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 16:00:56 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
> to parse or construct any URL.
>
> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
> according to the escaping mechanism defined in
On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 19:08:03 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
> te
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:45:44 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Does this address JDK-8288286 and allow ReflectionCallerCacheTest.java to be
> removed from ProblemList-Xcomp.txt?
I think JDK-8288286 should be addressed, but I would like to have it further
evaluated via more Mach5 testing before remove
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 15:28:36 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> > Could someone in Oracle help me run Mach 5 testing?
>
> The CI Passed for Tiers 1-3.
Thanks a lot!
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/8979
> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
> test cases are impacted.
Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull re
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 18:44:30 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
>> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
>> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 08:12:59 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> True, knowing when GC is 'done' is not deterministic except for a specify
>> Reference to a specific object.
>> System.gc is just a request, the checking for an object can more quickly
>> exit the loop.
>> The code is as is, and already co
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:48:07 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request with a new target base due
>> to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits:
>>
>> - Master
>> - use Reference.refersTo
>> - r
> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
> test cases are impacted.
Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:53:10 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request with a new target base due
>> to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits:
>>
>> - Master
>> - use Reference.refersTo
>> - r
On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 05:55:32 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
>> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
>> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
On Thu, 16 Jun 2022 16:08:04 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> remove trailing whitespaces
>
> test/jdk/java/io/ObjectStreamClass/TestOSCClassLoa
ooks good to me. Please help to
> run Mach5 just case the closed test cases are impacted.
Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 13 commits:
- Master
- use Reference.refersTo
- remove trailing whites
ooks good to me. Please help to
> run Mach5 just case the closed test cases are impacted.
Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
remove trailing whitespaces
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.
On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 22:37:52 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the pull request with a new target base due
>> to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains ten commits:
>>
>> - Merge
>> - Merge master
>> - Merge
>>
> This is a follow up update per comments in [JDK-8287384
> PR](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8907). The tier1 and tier2 test in
> open part looks good to me. Please help to run Mach5 just case the closed
> test cases are impacted.
Xue-Lei Andrew Fan has updated the
On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 22:21:18 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/ForceGC.java line 44:
>>
>>> 42: */
>>> 43: public static boolean wait(BooleanSupplier booleanSupplier) {
>>> 44: return wait(booleanSupplier, 1L);
>>
>> For the max waiting time, instead of
36 matches
Mail list logo
