jtreg failing in awt tests

[Jonathan Gibbons]

That bears investigation ... next week,

-- Jon

On 11/23/2016 07:39 PM, Philip Race wrote:
> We have a PIT (pre-integration-testing process) but if
> that these clashes are presented only as an FYI and not
> an actual failure then SQE might not notice it. It may
> even get swallowed and not forwarded for human inspection
> by some layered tool on top.
> I don't actually know .. I am just speculating.
>
> -phil.
>
> On 11/23/16, 6:50 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Phil Race <philip.race at oracle.com 
>> <mailto:philip.race at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     So your real complaint isn't the failure itself, but that jtreg
>>     bothers
>>     to check directories you aren't even running tests from, and
>>     that is a time tax whether such clashes exist or not ?
>>     Seems a reasonable point ... if I'm running a single Image I/O test
>>     jtreg still finds the java/awt clash and that can't be "free".
>>
>>
>> That was _one_ of my complaints!
>>
>> I'm also unhappy that jdk9/dev got poisoned by jdk9/client.  Having 
>> subforests is supposed to prevent that sort of breakage via proper 
>> release engineering.
>> I'm _not_ unhappy about the mistake itself - it's a classic software 
>> engineering trap we all fall into eventually if we do software long 
>> enough.