RFR (JAXP) 8169827: javax/xml/jaxp/isolatedjdk/catalog/PropertiesTest.sh copied JDK failed
Daniel Fuchs
daniel.fuchs at oracle.com
Mon Jan 23 16:12:25 UTC 2017
Hi Christoph,
Thanks for fixing this test!
I imported your patch, modified ProblemList.txt to not skip the test,
and sent it through our test system, and I'm happy to report that
the test was run on all available platforms with no failure.
So I think you should simply remove the line from ProblemList.txt
(no need for a new webrev).
If it fails again on more exotic platform we'll simply add it
back to ProblemList.txt for those platforms where it fails
(I guess it could happen if there's not enough disk space).
Otherwise I have looked over the changes you proposed and they
do seem OK to me.
+1
best regards,
-- daniel
On 23/01/17 10:03, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> Hi,
>
> while working on jaxp changes and running jtreg tests I found that test javax/xml/jaxp/isolatedjdk/catalog/PropertiesTest.sh does not work. I then saw that this was already reported with bug 8169827. But, as I had already spent some time to fix this test I'd like to contribute my fix:
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169827
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~clanger/webrevs/8169827.0/
>
> I converted the test to Java and removed the shell script PropertiesTest.sh. This resolves the compilation issue.
>
> However, the test needs to copy an isolated jdk as it modifies files in the JDK. So I'm still using the copy script to first copy the jdk and afterwards remove the copy. These are separate 'shell' test steps. And in the actual test I'm running a child process with the isolated JDK.
>
> I also don't know if the test should be kept in the problem list and/or also be tagged as 'intermittent' as the whole jdk copying procedure by means of a shell script seems error prone. In case we keep the entry in the problem list, I can also open a separate bug for my change.
>
> @Frank: I don't know if you have some larger change in mind which improves the isolated jdk type testing greatly, otherwise I think this fix could at least make things better than they are at the moment.
>
> Thanks & Best regards
> Christoph
>
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list