RFR 8170900: Issue with FilePermission::implies for wildcard flag(-)

[Wang Weijun]

> On Dec 22, 2016, at 4:39 AM, Xuelei Fan <xuelei.fan at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm trying to understand this update.  Does "/-" imply "/foo"?

Yes.

> 
> Does the following spec can be used to explain the new added note?
> 
>     *     <li>if the wildcard flag is "-", the simple pathname's path
>     *     must be recursively inside the wildcard pathname's path.

Yes.

But the precise meaning of "recursively inside" is different between the pre-jdk9 and jdk9 behaviors. The @implNote explains more.

--Max

> 
> Xuelei
> 
> On 12/19/2016 11:25 PM, Wang Weijun wrote:
>> Ping again.
>> 
>>> On Dec 14, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Wang Weijun <weijun.wang at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> An clarification is added to FilePermission::implies:
>>> 
>>>     * @implNote
>>>       ....
>>>     * a simple {@code npath} is recursively inside a wildcard {@code npath}
>>>     * if and only if {@code simple_npath.relativize(wildcard_npath)}
>>> -     * is a series of one or more "..". An invalid {@code FilePermission} does
>>> +     * is a series of one or more "..". Note that this means "/-" does not
>>> +     * imply "foo". An invalid {@code FilePermission} does
>>>     * not imply any object except for itself.
>>> 
>>> The newly added sentence is
>>> 
>>> Note that this means "/-" does not imply "foo".
>>> 
>>> JCK has agreed to update their test.
>>> 
>>> Since this is just a clarification inside an @implNote and no spec is updated, I suppose no CCC is needed. Please confirm.
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Max
>>> 
>>