JDK 8 b118 ea test results are now available

Balchandra Vaidya balchandra.vaidya at oracle.com
Thu Dec 12 04:19:44 PST 2013

On 12/11/13 07:54 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 11/12/2013 19:26, Balchandra Vaidya wrote:
>> :
>>> Alternatively, that segment of the script could be a candidate for a 
>>> target in
>>> one or more test/Makefile files.
>> This is good idea, but my experience with the 'make' is that if one 
>> target critically fail, all
>> subsequent targets will not run. I thought it is a restriction of 'make'.
> I think Jon is suggesting that the subset that you run be added to 
> TEST.groups (which will automatically turn it a make targe as way of 
> the jdk_% rule ). On the surface this is a good idea but when I look 
> at the subset of the tests that you are running:
> :jdk_core
> :jdk_svc
> :jdk_beans
> :jdk_imageio
> :jdk_sound
> :jdk_sctp
> javax/accessibility
> com/sun/java/swing
> javax/print
> sun/pisces
> com/sun/awt
> then it's a bit ad hoc. I wouldn't object to adding a special group 
> for this but it really amounts to all jdk tests except for:
> java/awt
> javax/swing
> sun/awt
> sun/java2d
> com/apple/eawt

I think it make sense to have an actively managed :jdk_stable group. I
know that all tests in e.g. javax/swing are not unstable, but it is a matter
of time (and testing on various OS) to figure out the unstable tests
that are causing the pain.


> If these tests aren't in your runs because of stability issues then we 
> should make sure that there are bugs submitted and that they get some 
> focus. In the interim then unstable tests can be @ignore-d or added to 
> the exclude list. I initially thought that part of the issue was the 
> othervm vs. agentvm discussion but I see in TEST.ROOT that 
> othervm.dirs lists these directories already.
> -Alan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/quality-discuss/attachments/20131212/ca84510e/attachment.html 

More information about the quality-discuss mailing list