8219918: ProblemList tests failing in SAP testing.

[David Holmes]

Hi Goetz,

This seems fine.

Thanks,
David

On 4/04/2019 9:53 pm, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> this is still not pushed ... some bugs were fixed in the meantime.
> This leaves only the aix failures on the list.
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr19/8219918-problemList/03/
> 
> Best regards,
>    Goetz.
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hotspot-dev <hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of
>> Lindenmaier, Goetz
>> Sent: Freitag, 1. März 2019 08:07
>> To: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> Subject: RE: 8219918: ProblemList tests failing in SAP testing.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I changed this to only ProblemList hotspot tests.
>> Please review.
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr19/8219918-problemList/02/
>>
>> Best regards,
>>    Goetz.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Daniel D. Daugherty <daniel.daugherty at oracle.com>
>>> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 4:48 PM
>>> To: Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com>; Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>> <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>; hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>> Subject: Re: 8219918: ProblemList tests failing in SAP testing.
>>>
>>> On 2/28/19 8:36 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>>> On 28/02/2019 13:05, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> in our testing we see a few tests failing at least since the jdk 11
>>>>> release.
>>>>> I opened bugs for these issues and would like to add them to
>>>>> the ProblemLists for now:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr19/8219918-problemList/01/
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think any of these issues are critical.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This excludes the the CopyAndMove.java test which is critical to
>>>> testing the Files.copy/move APIs. Can you start a discussion on
>>>> nio-dev with info about the test environment rather than excluding
>>>> this really important test.
>>>>
>>>> -Alan
>>>
>>> In the bug there is a mix of hotspot and jdk tests and this review
>>> request was only sent to hotspot-dev at ... I think trying to do this
>>> in one bug is not quite appropriate for review purposes. Perhaps
>>> an umbrella bug with subtasks? Dunno...
>>>
>>> Dan