harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sian January" <sianjanu...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Any reason not to commit HARMONY-5934 - HARMONY-5938?
Date Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:00:37 GMT
Ok - thanks Tim and Andrew.  I don't really have a good grasp of
whether this would be generally useful so I will leave the discussion
open for a couple of days and then if there are no more responses I
will close the JIRAs as "Won't Fix".  Does that sound reasonable?

2008/11/18 Andrew Cornwall <andrew.pack200@gmail.com>:
> I'll make the point that this allows Harmony code to be used in ways that
> its makers didn't intend - which could be considered a good thing. But I
> won't push too hard if you want to reject the changes, either :-)
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sian January wrote:
>> > Andrew Cornwall has contributed a set of patches that wrap calls to
>> > loadLibrary in an AccessController.doPrivileged(){} block.  It seems
>> > fine to me, but the JIRAs have been around for a while so I was just
>> > wondering if there's any reason not to commit the patches that I'm
>> > missing?
>> I looked at them a while ago...  Andrew makes the case that the modules
>> may not be running on the bootclasspath, which is why the doPrivileged()
>> block is required.
>> I'm note sure that this is a usecase that we want to maintain is it?
>> How far would we take it?!
>> Regards,
>> Tim

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

View raw message