RFR 8050402: Tests to check for use of policy files

[Amanda Jiang]

Hi Sean,

Thanks for reviewing this,  new comments has been addressed, please 
check the webrev below:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amjiang/8050402/webrev.03/

Thanks,
Amanda

On 9/24/15, 12:21 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Hi Amanda,
>
> Just a couple more comments.
>
> - The @bug tage in ExtensiblePolicyTest.java should be on a separate 
> line.
>
> - I'm not sure why some of the static methods in TVPermission need to 
> be synchronized. In particular I see no reason for getMask and 
> getActions to be synchronized.
>
> --Sean
>
> On 9/18/15 3:27 PM, Amanda Jiang wrote:
>> Hi Sean,
>>
>> Thanks for your comments.
>> Tests has been updated by your comments. For one test case, which needs
>> to create and sign a  jar file, then add signed jar file to classpatth,
>> so I create another java file for that test case. Please check new
>> webrev below and let me know your suggestions.
>>
>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amjiang/8050402/webrev.02/
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Amanda
>>
>>
>> On 7/29/15, 11:01 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:
>>> Hi Amanda,
>>>
>>> Rather than exec-ing java from within the test, I think it would be
>>> better if you used jtreg @run options to do that. For example:
>>>
>>> @run main/java.security.policy=ExtensiblePolicyTest1.policy
>>> ExtensiblePolicyTest1 false
>>> @run main/java.security.policy=ExtensiblePolicyTest2.policy
>>> ExtensiblePolicyTest1 true
>>>
>>> etc..
>>>
>>> I think this would lead to a more robust test and eliminate some
>>> overhead.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sean
>>>
>>> On 07/14/2015 03:15 PM, Amanda Jiang wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Please review a new test which checks Policy is extensible with user
>>>> defined permissions.
>>>>
>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050402
>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amjiang/8050402/webrev.01/
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Amanda
>>