RFR: 8355444: [java.io] Use @requires tag instead of exiting based on "os.name" property value

[Jaikiran Pai]

On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 20:46:42 GMT, Brian Burkhalter <bpb at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Use the `@requires` tag instead of obtaining the operating system name from the `os.name` property and then exiting if the test is not run on that operating system.

test/jdk/java/io/File/MacPathTest.java line 28:

> 26:  * @summary Tests paths on macOS
> 27:  * @requires (os.family == "mac")
> 28:  */

The missing `@test` on this looked odd, since that would mean that this test wasn't being run at all so far.

I went back and looked at the original RFR which introduced this test for https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-7130915. The RFR is here https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2012-June/010621.html. Going through the webrevs posted there, it appears that this was initially a shell test and had `@test` declaration.

Then in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8181912 we refactored it to be a java jtreg test. The RFR for that is here https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-June/048225.html. Going through this refactor RFR, the final webrev that was settled upon and integrated appears to be this https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2017-June/048319.html. So what that refactoring did was (https://cr.openjdk.org/~mli/8181912/webrev.01/) it moved the `@test` declaration to a new file `test/java/io/File/MacPath.java` which is what then launches this `test/jdk/java/io/File/MacPathTest.java`'s main method using `ProcessBuilder`. So this `MacPathTest.java` isn't really the jtreg `@test`. 

Given this, i think we shouldn't be adding this `@test` declaration here and `MacPath.java` already has the necessary `@requires (os.family == "mac")`. 

What we should probably do (if you prefer in a different issue/PR), is perhaps add a comment to this file that it gets launched through `MacPath.java` and also maybe remove the `os.name` checks in the `main()` method of this class.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24860#discussion_r2059696724