<AWT Dev> RFR(M) : 8210039 : move OSInfo to top level testlibrary

[Daniel Fuchs]

Hi Igor,

Nit: You could have introduced a
private static String getProperty(String name) {
      return AccessController.doP....
}
in Platform.java to avoid the long lines.

Otherwise looks good to me too!

best regards,

-- daniel

On 31/08/2018 19:42, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
> Alan, Chris,
> 
> thanks for looking at it, I went w/ the alternative suggested by Chris. that required a sprinkle of doPrivileged in the testlibrary, but now Sockets/policy.* files grant the minimal required permissions to the test code.
> the incremental webrev can found here[1], please let me know if you need the whole webrev.
> 
> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210039/webrev.0-1/index.html
> 
> Thanks,
> -- Igor
> 
> 
>> On Aug 30, 2018, at 3:28 AM, Chris Hegarty <chris.hegarty at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 30 Aug 2018, at 08:51, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/08/2018 17:50, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210039/webrev.00/index.html
>>>>> 698 lines changed: 114 ins; 240 del; 344 mod
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> could you please review this clean up of jdk testlibrary?
>>>> the patch updates the tests to use jdk.test.lib.Platform instead of jdk.testlibrary.OSInfo.OSType, cleans up OSInfo and renames it to jdk.test.lib.OSVersion.
>>>>
>>>> testing: changed tests + :jdk_desktop test group
>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210039/webrev.00/index.html
>>>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210039
>>>>
>>> The updates to the Sockets policy file suggests using this jdk.test.lib.Platform/OSVersion requires permissions that the test infrastructure needs, not the test. It's not wrong but it's always a concern when tests running with a security manager are granted non-obvious permissions.
>>
>> The uses of test libraries with security manager is a little
>> cumbersome, and usually ends up with the test code being
>> granted more permissions than is necessary. I share Alan’s
>> concern.
>>
>> Another alternative, that we used in other areas, is to grant
>> the test library only minimal permissions, separate to the
>> actual test code. For example:
>>
>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/9183040e34d8/test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/AsFileDownloadTest.policy#l24 <http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/file/9183040e34d8/test/jdk/java/net/httpclient/AsFileDownloadTest.policy#l24>
>>
>> -Chris.
>