RFR: Fix jtreg test java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Basic.java

[Siebenborn, Axel]

Good catch Volker! 
I forgot the link to the webrev:
I'm a bit out of practice.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asiebenborn/jtreg_ProcessBuilder/webrev/

Thanks, 
Axel



-----Original Message-----
From: Volker Simonis [mailto:volker.simonis at gmail.com] 
Sent: Dienstag, 13. März 2018 19:39
To: Siebenborn, Axel <axel.siebenborn at sap.com>
Cc: portola-dev at openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: Fix jtreg test java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Basic.java

You probably also wanted to post this URL to your webrev :)

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asiebenborn/jtreg_ProcessBuilder/webrev/

In general, how should we proceed with fixes for portola? Just post
webrevs or do you expect us to open bugs in JBS for every issue?

Thanks,
Volker


On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Siebenborn, Axel
<axel.siebenborn at sap.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently looking into jtreg failures,  that occur with the portola jdk.
>
> A first issue I tackled, was the failing test 'java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Basic.java'
>
> The test copies the executable '/bin/true' and '/bin/false'. However, on alpine linux, these are just links to /bin/busybox.
> Copying the busbox executable into a file with a different name won't result in the expected return codes.
>
> Another problem with this test is a bug in musl, that probably won't be fixed [1]. 'execvp' has not the fallback to /bin/sh.
>
> Regards,
> Axel
>
> [1] http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2018/03/09/2
>
>