[8u] RFR: 8226607: Inconsistent info between pcsclite.md and MUSCLE headers

Severin Gehwolf sgehwolf at redhat.com
Wed Sep 25 15:49:33 UTC 2019


On Wed, 2019-09-25 at 15:59 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 02/09/2019 16:05, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-09-02 at 15:38 +0100, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> > > On 26/08/2019 14:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > Could I get a review of this follow-up fix for an 8u backport (JDK-
> > > > 8218780)? This follow-up re-adds a COPYING file to the MUSCLE pcsc
> > > > library header files removed by the JDK-8218780 backport. The patch
> > > > differs from the version in JDK 11 since there is no pcsclite.md file
> > > > in OpenJDK 8u.
> > > > 
> > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226607
> > > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8226607/jdk8/01/webrev/
> > > > JDK 11u changeset: https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk-updates/jdk11u-dev/rev/9e304e99cbb2
> > > > 
> > > > I intend to push this fix together with JDK-8218780 once it passed
> > > > review and got approved.
> > > > 
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Severin
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > The *.md files in OpenJDK 9+ are the modular equivalent of the
> > > THIRD_PARTY_README file found in each OpenJDK 8u repository. See my
> > > review of JDK-8217676 [0] for Zhengyu for more details.
> > > 
> > > For reference, the conversion took place in JDK-8169925.
> > 
> > Thanks for this. Updated webrev:
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8226607/jdk8/02/webrev/
> > 
> > I intend to push the same updat to 
> > THIRD_PARTY_README files on all other repos. Example here is jdk repo.
> > Do you want to see webrevs of this THIRD_PARTY_README update for all 7
> > other repos?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Severin
> > 
> > > [0]
> > > https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2019-August/010116.html
> > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169925
> 
> I'm happy assuming the same THIRD_PARTY_README change for all repos.
> 
> This looks fine to me.

Thanks for the review!

> Can you flag it jdk8u-critical-request so we can
> get this into 8u232 with JDK-8218780?

Done.

Thanks,
Severin




More information about the security-dev mailing list