jmx-dev 8001048: Allow IIOP transport to be optional

[Daniel Fuchs]

Hi Alan,

Looks OK.

However I noticed something strange in MissingClassTest.java, which
I hadn't seen before. In this test, it seems that the "iiop" protocol
is simply skipped (line 114).

It was already like that before your changes - but it seems the test
was originally written to test iiop too. I'm not sure why
"iiop" is skipped. Maybe that was an oversight - or more probably
because the test was randomly failing?

-- daniel


On 12/17/12 12:58 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 14/12/2012 21:33, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>
>> :
>>
>> The webrev with the changes is here:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/8001048/webrev/index.html
> I've refreshed this webrev to take account of some of the comments from
> Dmitry and Daniel.
>
> Specifically, I've changed com.sun.jmx.remote.internal.IIOPHelper (which
> we added then we originally decoupled the dependency on CORBA/IIOP) so
> that the exportObject, unexportObject and toStub methods throws
> exceptions when IIOP is not available. This avoids the the code in
> RMIIIOPServerImpl from doing the checks.
>
> I've restored the additional trace messages in AddressableTest that
> Daniel pointed out. I've also put additional checks in IIOPURLTest and
> ProviderTest.
>
> Otherwise the changes are the same with the most important part to this
> being the javadoc changes.
>
> -Alan