[Fwd: Re: Request for approval: Bugs 6837665 and 6829575]

[Joe Darcy]

Hi Andrew.

On 05/19/09 10:51 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> I think I sent it to the wrong list.
>
> Forwarding to jdk6-dev instead of build-dev.
>
> Andrew.
>   
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> Re: Request for approval: Bugs 6837665 and 6829575
> From:
> Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>
> Date:
> Tue, 19 May 2009 18:26:57 +0100
> To:
> Jonathan Gibbons <Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com>
>
> To:
> Jonathan Gibbons <Jonathan.Gibbons at sun.com>
> CC:
> "build-dev at openjdk.java.net" <build-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>
>
> Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>   
>> That's an exceedingly old file you have there -- langtools
>> src/share/opensource/* should have disappered a long time ago.
>>     
>
> Hmm, I checked it out of the repository an hour or so ago.
>
> `hg parents' says
>
> changeset:   43:9820754525dd
> tag:         tip
> user:        ohair
> date:        Wed May 06 12:01:57 2009 -0700
> summary:     6831225: Upgrade JPRT jobs to use newer Linux 2.6 (e.g. Fedora 9)
>
> Andrew.
>
>
>   
>> On May 19, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> This is for the OpenJDK 6 trees.
>>>
>>> The patch is very similar to that now committed to OpenJDK 7, but it
>>> touches a few more places that control debuginfo.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/6829575-jdk6-webrev/
>>>
>>> Andrew.
>>>       

Catching up on email, I approve this going back into OpenJDK 6 assuming 
successful builds on the plain OpenJDK 6 forest have been done.

What is the difference between the OpenJDK 6 patch and the JDK 7 patch?

Thanks,

-Joe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/attachments/20090526/c92242a2/attachment.html