Test Backports

[Joe Darcy]

On 03/31/10 02:41 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 31 March 2010 20:09, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>   
>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>     
>>> On 29 March 2010 20:52, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> There are a set of bidi and math tests:
>>>>>
>>>>> changeset:   817:8ea49fa4c2f7
>>>>> user:        peytoia
>>>>> date:        Fri Oct 17 13:34:03 2008 +0900
>>>>> summary:     6759521: Move Bidi test programs from closed to open.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/jdk/rev/8ea49fa4c2f7
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> I approve the bidi tests going back; please verify they pass first though
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Passed and pushed;
>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6/jdk/rev/e1549056d958
>>>
>>>       
>> Thanks.
>>
>>     
>>>>> changeset:   809:f3ad2ee4600b
>>>>> user:        darcy
>>>>> date:        Mon Jan 26 19:49:26 2009 -0800
>>>>> description:
>>>>> 6601457: Move wrapper class tests from closed to open
>>>>> 6601458: Move java.math tests from closed to open
>>>>> 6740185: Move java/lang/annotations tests to open
>>>>> 6759433: Move Math and StrictMath regression tests from closed to open
>>>>> Summary: Move some more regression tests to the open
>>>>> Reviewed-by: jjg
>>>>>
>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/jdk/rev/f3ad2ee4600b
>>>>>
>>>>> that were opened up in OpenJDK7.  Ok to backport these to 6?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> However, I deny these other tests being backported since they have long
>>>> been
>>>> in OpenJDK 6 :-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Doh!  Looks like they were still lurking around in the IcedTea tree
>>> but no longer being applied.
>>>
>>> I found a bunch of others too:
>>>
>>> comparing with ssh://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6-gate/jdk
>>> searching for changes
>>> changeset:   308:d5dc9130bdb0
>>> user:        volk
>>> date:        Sun Apr 13 23:41:40 2008 +0400
>>> summary:     6686273: Some AWT reg. tests should be moved to open
>>> repository (for CRs 6444769, 6480547, and 6560348)
>>>
>>> changeset:   309:fa6cfc27b519
>>> user:        ant
>>> date:        Wed Mar 26 16:20:01 2008 +0300
>>> summary:     6680135: A number of test/closed/java/awt/Focus/* tests
>>> should be opened
>>>
>>> changeset:   310:285a274f844a
>>> user:        sherman
>>> date:        Mon Jun 30 14:06:34 2008 -0700
>>> summary:     6675856: Open charset tests
>>>
>>> changeset:   311:47f907e9c9b3
>>> user:        malenkov
>>> date:        Thu Jun 26 15:11:04 2008 +0400
>>> summary:     6718964: Swing border tests should be open source
>>>
>>> changeset:   312:a6d7e84e31e1
>>> user:        malenkov
>>> date:        Thu Jun 26 15:39:12 2008 +0400
>>> summary:     6718965: Swing color chooser tests should be open source
>>>
>>> changeset:   313:62168e9450f9
>>> user:        sherman
>>> date:        Thu Aug 13 15:01:18 2009 -0700
>>> summary:     6676423: (prefs) Opensource unit/regression tests for
>>> java.util.prefs
>>>
>>> changeset:   314:83980d94b138
>>> tag:         tip
>>> user:        sherman
>>> date:        Wed Jan 27 19:39:55 2010 -0800
>>> summary:     6920732: opensource test/java/nio/charset
>>>
>>> Ok to backport?  The majority pass, with the failures being in the AWT
>>> ones (may be my setup, as some of the existing ones fail too) and
>>> prefs (I think it's trying to acquire a lock on a NFS mount).
>>>
>>>       
>> Yes in principle, but let me dig into the particular changes a bit to
>> double-check they're applicable to and appropriate for OpenJDK 6.
>>
>>     
>
> Ok, the comments suggested to me they were forwardports from the
> proprietary tree but good to check.
>   

I've looked over each of these patches, and they all seem applicable to 
OpenJDK 6 so I approve all of them going back.

(It is feasible a patch would be applicable to a portion of the 
proprietary JDK 7, but not applicable to the corresponding portion of 
OpenJDK 6.)

> On my queue, I have four more Zero patches and a set of backports I'd
> like in (making the source/target explicit as we did in 7 already, and
> Kelly's ant 1.8 patch).  Everything else can wait until b20

Sounds good.

Cheers,

-Joe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/attachments/20100405/1b7742fa/attachment.html