RFR: JDK-8073158 zip files with total entry count 0xFFFF need not be ZIP64 files

[Martin Buchholz]

The Right Thing is to have only one C Zip implementation, shared by
launcher, zip_util, and pack200.  And my change is one step towards that,
but I'm not tackling the big job right now.

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Xueming Shen <xueming.shen at oracle.com>
wrote:

>
> It looks fine...I hope you guys also have some tests over there to bring
> in more confidence :-)
>
> It might be "easier" to simply update the original haveZIP64() with the
> code
> we have in zip_util.c in which we also try to read the end64 to verify if
> we
> really have one. Your choice though.
>
> -Sherman
>
>
> On 03/25/2015 09:55 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
> Yeah, this review is kinda scary.  There's a lot of technical debt here,
> and this change only addresses some of it.
>
>  A variant of this code is in use at Google.
>
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Martin Buchholz <martinrb at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>>  Hi Xueming and Alan,
>>
>>  I'd like you to do a code review.
>>
>>  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073158
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk9/0xffff-entries-zip-file/
>>
>>  Of course, the really correct thing is to have at most one zip
>> implementation per programming language, but I'm not trying to fix that
>> here (how many zip implementations does openjdk have?)
>>
>
>
>