Round #2: RFR: 8049365 - Update JDI and JDWP for modules

[Alan Bateman]

On 22/01/2016 03:34, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>
> I saw the discussion but have no strong opinion yet.
> Changing to JVMTI_VERSION_9 will make it more consistent though.
Thanks. We can always revert it if it turns out that there is a good 
reason not to move it to 9 and keep it in sync with the Java SE version. 
Capturing this in JEP 223 would be good but may be a bit beyond the 
original scope.


>
> I could easily fix it now but it is Ok to file a separate bug.
I created JDK-8147943 yesterday to track it and also linked it to 
JDK-8063154, the issue to remove jvmti.h from the jdk repo and use the 
generated header.

Sorting out these issues it not core to what we are doing here so I 
suggest just bringing over the changes from the generated jvmti.h to the 
checked in jvmti.h. That will ensure that the jvmti.h in the JDK image 
has the right copyright header.

>
>
> Will provide an update in the next review round.
Thanks and assuming we are down to minor issues then I think we should 
get the patches into jake and iterate on them as needed. Also I think of 
this patch as just a first step, there will be more once the IDEs start 
to add explore debugging code in modules.

-Alan.