[8u232-b08] New test failures due to tzdata-updates

[Severin Gehwolf]

Hi,

The latest EA tags of the jdk8u/jdk8u tree (jdk8u232-b08) have new test
failures in. jdk8u232-b07 was OK:

sun/util/calendar/zi/TestZoneInfo310.java

The failure looks like this:

Compiling tz files!
testing!
OLD.getZoneInfoOld()[1]=648
OLD.getZoneInfoOld()[2]=194
OLD.getZoneInfoOld()[3]=169
OLD.getAvailableIDs()=746, total=628
OLD.getAliasTable()=493, total=228
OLD.TotalTZ()=80 (ms)
NEW.getTimeZone()[1]=70
NEW.getTimeZone()[2]=16
NEW.getTimeZone()[3]=9
NEW.getAvailableIDs()=18, total=628
NEW.getAliasTable()=74, total=228
NEW.TotalTZ()=1 (ms)
******************************
America/Campo_Grande : America/Campo_Grande
    offset=-14400000,dstSavings=0,useDaylight=false,transitions=93,offsets=4,checksum=-718118701,gmtChanged=false
[NG]offset=-14400000,dstSavings=3600000,useDaylight=false,transitions=129,offsets=4,checksum=374743623,gmtChanged=false
    -------------
    (NG) Different trans size :93, 129
                  1900-01-01T00:00  [utc=-2208988800   raw=fffffdfdae01dc00, offset=-13108/-03:38:28, saving=0]
    (OK)          1900-01-01T00:00  [utc=-2208988800   raw=fffffdfdae01dc00, offset=-13108/-03:38:28, saving=0]
            -----

Failures are also observed at AdoptOpenJDK:
https://ci.adoptopenjdk.net/view/Test_upstream/job/Test_openjdk8_hs_sanity.openjdk_x86-64_windows_upstream/19/

These failures are due to these two changesets:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/d355fd566378
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/8560bc534080

Both of them would need to update tzdata copies in the test subtree for
the tests to pass again.

The addendum for JDK-8228469 (rev d355fd566378) would be this:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8228469-8u-fixup/01/webrev/

The addendum for JDK-8231098 (rev 8560bc534080) would be this:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8231098-8u-fixup/02/webrev/

The current code in jdk8u232-b08 compares tzdata2019a (test code) with
tzdata2019c (jdk code). Thus the test failure(s).

Shall I create 8u-only bugs for them or is there another, preferred,
solution to this?

Thanks,
Severin