harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sian January" <sianjanu...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [vote] Declare r681495 as M7
Date Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:29:18 GMT
On 20/08/2008, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> In message <3b3f27c60808191746h7a5dd82arad5647ddcaadef50@mail.gmail.com>,
> "Nathan Beyer" writes:
> >
> > nathan:~$ update-alternatives --display javap
> > javap - status is auto.
> >  link currently points to /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/bin/javap
> > /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/bin/javap - priority 63
> >  slave javap.1.gz: /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/man/man1/javap.1.gz
> > Current `best' version is /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/bin/javap.
>
> Hopefully Sian will provide a quick fix for this common case.  In the
> meantime, what is you position on M7?  Do you think M7 needs a fix for
> this issue?  Are there other must-fix issues that you consider blockers?
>
> I would not be unhappy to release r681495 as M7 since these are test
> issues rather than code issues and we have released with failures due
> to bad tests before.  So I vote +1 on this thread.
>
> Of course, if Sian can provide a prompt fix for this test issue then she
> has my +1 to commit it and we can start another vote.
>

Thanks Mark - I've checked in a fix for the two tests at r687281.

> > Perhaps using 'javap' isn't the most stable/portable approach. Can we
> > use one of the bytecode libraries we have already and run the class
> > files through that?
>
> I'm sure Sian is considering other options for M8. ;-)
>

Yes - I think I said this yesterday too.  I personally don't think
it's worth holding up M7 for since it's a test issue rather than a
code issue, but I will do it if other people think it's important for
M7.

> -Mark
>
>


-- 
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU

Mime
View raw message