[7u10] Request for approval: 7114558: Inet4AddressImpl should use memset (rather than bzero) and NI_MAXHOST (rather than MAXHOSTNAMELEN)

[Seán Coffey]

Ok -  good point Alan. I'd missed that they were connected. Ideally, 
they could have been submitted for approval together.

Like 7112670 then, it's best to follow this up by reviewing on 
net-dev at openjdk if Shi Jun wants to push on with porting this changeset 
to 7u. All comments to date suggest that 7112670/7114558 shouldn't go 
into jdk7u without further analysis and discussion.

regards,
Sean.

On 18/09/2012 21:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Sean - this one is relative to 7112670 which is one of the changes 
> that we have concerns about.
>
> -Alan.
>
> On 18/09/2012 19:09, Seán Coffey wrote:
>> Approved for jdk7u-dev.  Note that this most likely means the fix 
>> will end up in 7u12. If there's a strong justification for 7u10 
>> inclusion, let me know and one of the jdk7u maintainers can help you 
>> work through a phase2 request[1] for 7u10.
>>
>> I'll create a bug record to track this fix in jdk7u.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sean.
>>
>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7u/phase2/phase2-process.html
>>
>> On 17/09/2012 09:22, Shi Jun Zhang wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'd like to request for approval to push the following change into 
>>> 7u10.
>>>
>>> Changeset in jdk8
>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/ee2fa62fb09f
>>>
>>> Webrev
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~zhangshj/jdk7u/7114558/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> Reviewed by chegar
>>>
>>> Review thread
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2011-November/003778.html 
>>>
>>>
>>> This patch is based on its previous patch I posted just now.
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk7u-dev/2012-September/004449.html 
>>>
>>>
>>
>