Need reviewers - jdk testing changes 6888927

[Kelly O'Hair]

Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Kelly O'Hair wrote:
>>>
>>> I like this idea, the time to run a jdk jtreg test has put me off in 
>>> the past.
>>> BTW, jtreg is the one thing I wouldn't mind having in the tree as it's
>>> not something people are likely to have installed.  IcedTea has a cut
>>> down copy and that means tests get run.
>>>
>>
>> I could add some makefile rules that detect when JT_HOME is not defined
>> or cannot be found, then do a wget of the jtreg bundle and installs it
>> in the build/*/ area for use. Just hate to have that repeatedly done
>> over and over. I usually keep the latest jtreg in my own ~/import area
>> along with the 1.7.1 ant and latest findbugs.
>>
>> Not sure what the best answer is for insuring the latest jtreg is
>> available to use.
> 
> There's a lot of setup needed for a JDK build, making sure that all the 
> right
> stuff is installed -- it's not clear to me why jtreg should be singled 
> out for
> special treatment.  That being said, it would be nice to have more uniform
> support for making sure that everything necessary is available.
> 

True. jtreg is just one of many.

I have a simple script that when run populates my ${HOME}/import area
with whatever things are easily downloaded and installed.

As far as "making sure that everything necessary is available", I think
Monty Python did a movie about that, something about the Holy Grail? ;^)

-kto

> -- Jon