[icedtea-web] RFC: Patch to fix PR778

[Deepak Bhole]

* Danesh Dadachanji <ddadacha at redhat.com> [2011-10-20 17:48]:
> Hi,
> 
> [snip]
> 
> >
> >Ok for head and 1.1?
> 
> It fails to patch in 1.1 because the changeset that implemented the
> synchronization of this class was never backported:
> 
> http://icedtea.classpath.org/hg/icedtea-web/rev/0398f63d1b21
> 

Hmm, yeah looks like minor changes may be needed to adapt to 1.1.

> Would it be better to backport or to remove the synchronized clauses
> from the patch? From reading the email Denis sent out[1], it looks
> like backporting was just never brought up. Perhaps that should be
> revisited?
> 

I am not sure why it was not discussed either. Though if I was to guess,
it was probably because Denis thought it was potentially too disruptive
for a stable line.

It has been there for a while now though and given the issue, I think we
should backport the above to 1.1. Thoughts?

Cheers,
Deepak