Backporting changeset from 7 to 6 for bugfix

[Joe Darcy]

Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 11 June 2010 05:31, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>   
>> Joe Darcy wrote:
>>     
>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>       
>>>> On 10 June 2010 02:02, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Andrew Su wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>> [snip]
>>     
>>>> changeset:   2208:0137b5857c63
>>>> parent:      2183:90248595ec35
>>>> user:        okutsu
>>>> date:        Wed Mar 10 14:32:47 2010 +0900
>>>> summary:     6932473: (tz) javazic produces incorrect SimpleTimeZone
>>>> parameters with Sun<=7
>>>>
>>>> Do these look ok?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> Yes; also approved to go back.
>>>
>>> Since some Sun copyrighted files have leaked back in, we'll done another
>>> pass to clean up any such files before b20 goes final.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> I think only a few more changes are needed to wrap up b20:
>>
>> * The various backports identified in the earlier message in this thread
>>     
>
> Done now.
>
>   
>> * Backport of 6957375 "java/net/ResponseCache getResponseCode and
>> ResponseCacheTest fail after rebranding"
>>     
>
> I see this come in while I was backporting; had to merge.
>
>   
>> * One more pass of the Sun -> Oracle copyright script
>>
>>     
>
> There are some new Zero bugfixes that could be backported for b20 (and
> would allow us to drop the local copy in IcedTea6).
> I've CCed Gary Benson who should be able to provide a list of bug IDs
> for backport.
>
> Other than that, we should be good to go with b20.
>
>   

Being able to drop the copy of Zero in IcedTea sounds worthwhile.  After 
looking over the bugids and a webrev, I'd expect to approve those fixes 
going back.

The Zero fixes are the last currently planned fixes for b20.

-Joe