[9] RFR 8157881: security.provider property description needs to be updated for modules

[Sean Mullan]

On 06/09/2016 04:38 PM, Valerie Peng wrote:
> Sean,
>
> Can you please help reviewing this? I suppose we don't need to file CCC
> for this, right?

Right, since it was covered in a previous CCC.

> There is already an earlier one under 7191662 and this
> is just updating comments in java.security file.
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8157881
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/8157881/webrev.00/


36 # specify either the provider name or the name of provider class
37 # and priority in the format

since you describe the difference between provName and className below, 
I suggest simplifying this sentence as:

"specify the provider and priority in the format"

57 # There must be at least one provider specification in java.security.
58 # There is a default provider that comes standard with the JDK. It
59 # is called the "SUN" provider. Thus, the "SUN" provider is registered
60 # via the following:
61 #
62 #    security.provider.1=SUN
63 #

This whole paragraph is a bit out-of-date. There is more than one 
provider included in the JDK. And the SUN provider is not always the #1 
provider (ex: on Solaris). That first sentence is a little odd too, do 
we really check if there is at least one provider?

My thought is to remove this whole paragraph - it doesn't seem useful 
and is out-of-date.

--Sean