[8u] RFR: 8146215: (fs) java/nio/file/Files/probeContentType/Basic.java failed frequently on Solaris-sparc with Unexpected type: text/plain

[Hohensee, Paul]

This looks fine, except that the patch should be based on the result of "hg export --git".
	
Thanks,
Paul

On 6/30/20, 5:19 AM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Alex Kashchenko" <jdk8u-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net on behalf of akashche at redhat.com> wrote:

    On 06/29/2020 01:47 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
    > On 26/06/2020 23:30, Alex Kashchenko wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> Please review the backport of JDK-8146215 to 8u:
    >>
    >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146215
    >>
    >> 9 commit: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/44bb7c7997ca
    >>
    >> 8u webrev: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akasko/jdk8u/8146215/webrev.00/
    >>
    >> 8u code change is almost identical to 9, only copyright year is changed
    >> in AbstractFileTypeDetector.java. Test part doesn't apply cleanly,
    >> because probeContentType/Basic.java in 9 contains changes that are not
    >> in 8u (JDK-8129632 and others), it is adjusted for 8u. Testing: included
    >> test, jck:api/java_net;api/java_nio.
    >>
    >>
    >
    > Hi Alex,
    >
    > The class library code changes look fine.
    >
    > For the testing, I think JDK-8150204 should at least be backported
    > first. It's a test-only change, and you're effectively doing that in
    > this patch, but uncredited. I can understand the reluctance to backport
    > the Mac OS X fix, JDK-8129632, so I'm happy for the 8150204 backport to
    > just take the testing changes from 8129632 as part of it, or work around
    > them as you have here.
    >
    > Once 8150204 is in place, this backport should be close to the 11u version.

    Thanks for your comments! I've posted 8150204 for review:

    https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2020-June/012063.html


    --
    -Alex