RFR: 8192837 Need new test for release file info

[Martin Buchholz]

Thanks for implementing my test suggestions, Randy.  Looks good.

It looks like all builds should have a "release" file, and all "release"
files should have a SOURCE= line, so I might make those checks
unconditonally.  If there are other sanity checks for the "release" file,
then I might try to coalesce the tests so there is less duplication.

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Randy Crihfield <Randy.Crihfield at oracle.com
> wrote:

>
> If I understand this correctly, this fixes the bug and gives more clarity.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8192837/webrev.02/
>
> Randy
>
>
> On 12/18/17 07:23 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
>   28  * @summary Test to verify release file not contains close repo info if it's open bundle
>
> "closed" would be much clearer than "close"
>
> ---
>
>   58                 readIn.trim();
>
> This is a classic bug that should really be caught by static analysis
> somewhere (e.g. http://errorprone.info/bugpattern/CheckReturnValue)
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Randy Crihfield <
> Randy.Crihfield at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/18/17 02:40 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>> Here it is Mr Martin
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8192837/webrev.01/
>>
>> Fixed the bugID link and changed the variables to what I believe you are
>> asking for.
>> Also made the bug public.
>> Thanks for the help!
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>
>> Hi Randy,
>>
>> Your bugid link in the webrev is broken - points to bogus
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/https://bugs.openjdk.ja
>> va.net/browse/JDK-8192837
>> Please fix.
>>
>> OTOH, https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8192837 is not public -
>> please fix.
>>
>>   92         String sJdkPath = System.getProperty("test.jdk");
>>   93         String sRuntime = System.getProperty("java.runtime.name");
>>
>> This looks like Hungarian Notation, which is not normal in openjdk code,
>> so s/sJdkPath/jdkPath/ etc.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Randy Crihfield <
>> Randy.Crihfield at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have created an OpenJDK negative test that confirms the closed source
>>> files are not included in the SOURCE.
>>>
>>> Version of the actual test for review:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shurailine/8192837/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> Any comments/suggestions are welcome, also I will need a sponsor for it
>>> at the end…
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>