OpenJDK 6 build 16 source bundle posted

[Joe Darcy]

Hello.

There was a misunderstanding with RE; the posted b16 sources were based 
on an internal staging repository being used to hold the security fixes 
before they were made public.  Fixes pushed to the public repo after 
that point were not included.  I've asked RE to redo a version of b16 to 
reflect the current state of the OpenJDK 6 repositories, including the 
little cms changes.  The new source bundled and corresponding tags in 
the repository should be available within a few days.

Sorry for the confusion,

-Joe

On 04/22/09 09:37 AM, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
> I'll check with our RE folks to see what is going on...
>
> -Joe
>
> Phil Race wrote:
>> All I know is that I pushed the change 4 whole weeks ago.
>> How the b16 source bundle was created is not something into which
>> I have any insight.
>>
>> -phil.
>>
>> Lillian Angel wrote:
>>> Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
>>>> Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
>>>>> Lillian Angel wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
>>>>>>> Without further adieu, the source bundle for OpenJDK 6 b16 is 
>>>>>>> available from
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk6/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and the OpenJDK 6 Mercurial repositories 
>>>>>>> (http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6) will be tagged with the 
>>>>>>> build information accordingly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The previous source bundle was for b14.  There was no distinct 
>>>>>>> b15 per se; b15 was used to mark the transition from teamware to 
>>>>>>> Mercurial.  The b16 build is the first to be done purely in 
>>>>>>> Mercurial.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There were 45 bug fixes in this build ranging from security 
>>>>>>> fixes to sound updates; OpenJDK 6 b16 has all relevant security 
>>>>>>> fixes from the recent JDK synchronized security release.  A few 
>>>>>>> fixes of note, during a build importing binary plugs now 
>>>>>>> defaults to false (6781572 "Default to IMPORT_BINARY_PLUGS=false 
>>>>>>> for OpenJDK 6 builds") and several fixes were applied that 
>>>>>>> should render a few IcedTea patches unnecessary:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   6736248 EnumEditor bug. Class check incorrect
>>>>>>>   6733718 test 
>>>>>>> /java/awt/FullScreen/UninitializedDisplayModeChangeTest/ fails
>>>>>>>   6593946 (bf) X-Buffer.compact() does not discard mark as 
>>>>>>> specified
>>>>>>>   6778493 Fix (langtools) ant build to honor fcs MILESTONE setting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The other non security bugs fixed in this build are:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6761791: Crash in the FontManager code due to use of JNIEnv 
>>>>>>> saved by another thread
>>>>>>> 6512707: "incompatible types" after (unrelated) annotation 
>>>>>>> processing
>>>>>>> 6632696: Writing to closed output files (writeBytes) leaks 
>>>>>>> native memory (unix)
>>>>>>> 6788196: (porting) Bounds checks in io_util.c rely on undefined 
>>>>>>> behaviour
>>>>>>> 6791458: FileInputStream/RandomAccessFile.read leaks memory if 
>>>>>>> invoked on closed stream with len > 8k
>>>>>>> 6792066: src/share/native/java/io/io_util.c clean-ups
>>>>>>> 6819886: System.getProperty("os.name") reports Vista on Windows 7
>>>>>>> 6821031: Upgrade OpenJDK's LittleCMS version to 1.18
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, the 1.18 version was not included in this release. b16 
>>>>>> still includes 1.16. Any thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Phil?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Joe
>>>>
>>>> PS b16 does include this changeset, does it not?
>>>>
>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6/jdk/rev/2bdeec6199b7
>>>
>>> Apparently not. This change shows that has clearly been updated to 
>>> 1.18 (see version in comment), but it does not appear in the b16 
>>> sources (still says 1.16):
>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6/jdk/diff/2bdeec6199b7/src/share/native/sun/java2d/cmm/lcms/lcms.h 
>>>
>>>
>>> Lillian
>