[8u] RFR 8044500: [1/2] Add kinit options and krb5.conf flags that allow users to obtain renewable tickets and specify ticket lifetimes

[Volker Simonis]

Hi Max,

thanks a lot for the background information. That definitely helps and
makes the changes in the test command line arguments clear.

No more objections from me. Reviewed.

Best regards,
Volker


Weijun Wang <weijun.wang at oracle.com> schrieb am Do., 9. Jan. 2020, 04:24:

> Some explanations of the name provider in KDC.java:
>
> Most tests in krb5/auto needs to treat any host name as 127.0.0.1. Until
> JDK 8, I used an inner class KDC$KDCNameService to do this. It was
> specified in META-INF/services and turned on with the
> -Dsun.net.spi.nameservice.provider.1=ns,mock system property in each test.
>
> In JDK 9, JDK-8134577 introduced a /etc/hosts-style file TestHosts in the
> same directory. It needs to be copied to the working directory with "@run
> main jdk.test.lib.FileInstaller TestHosts TestHosts" and then enabled with
> -Djdk.net.hosts.file=TestHosts.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> --Max
>
> > On Jan 8, 2020, at 12:48 AM, Volker Simonis <volker.simonis at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > The difference in the "test/sun/security/krb5/auto/KDC.java" are still
> > confusing but that's obviously caused by the dowport of 8187218 which
> > already brought in a much newer version of that test. I'm only
> > wondering if the Tier1&Tier2 tests you've run include the KDC.java
> > test (or if you've run it manually otherwise). If it passes I think
> > the current version is fine.
> >
> > A final point are the additional test arguments
> > "-Dsun.net.spi.nameservice.provider.1=ns,mock" for
> > "test/sun/security/krb5/auto/Renewal.java". Are they required in order
> > to make the test work in jdk8? And the same question like for the
> > previous test: is it part of Tier1&Tier2 or did you run it manually
> > and does it pass?
> >
> > So if the included tests pass, I'm fine with this downport and you can
> > consider it reviewed (if nothing exceptional happens, I should even be
> > an "official" JDK 8 Updates Reviewer by the end of today :)
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Volker
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 12:00 AM Hohensee, Paul <hohensee at amazon.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ping for the new year. :)
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> On 12/2/19, 2:07 PM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul" <
> jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of hohensee at amazon.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>    Ping for another review pls.
> >>
> >>    Thanks,
> >>    Paul
> >>
> >>    On 11/18/19, 3:40 PM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul" <
> jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of hohensee at amazon.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>        Lgtm, but would another reviewer also take a look please?
> >>
> >>        Thanks,
> >>
> >>        Paul
> >>
> >>        On 11/8/19, 11:39 AM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Verghese, Clive" <
> jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of verghese at amazon.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>            Hi,
> >>
> >>            Requesting review for backport of JDK-8044500,
> >>
> >>            JBS Issue : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044500
> >>            Original Change :
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/fb5752b152d9
> >>            Webrev :
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alvdavi/webrevs/8044500/webrev.8u.00/
> >>
> >>            This is backport is a dependency for backporting JDK-8186576.
> >>
> >>            Parts of this backport have already been backported into
> JDK-8044500.
> >>            The patch did not apply cleanly and the major difference were
> >>
> >>              *   Variable name changes in KDC.java
> >>              *   Imports in Config.java
> >>
> >>            Both Tier1 and Tier2 tests in Linux x64.
> >>
> >>            Regards,
> >>            Clive Verghese
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>