<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
We have a PIT (pre-integration-testing process) but if<br>
that these clashes are presented only as an FYI and not<br>
an actual failure then SQE might not notice it. It may<br>
even get swallowed and not forwarded for human inspection<br>
by some layered tool on top.<br>
I don't actually know .. I am just speculating.<br>
<br>
-phil.<br>
<br>
On 11/23/16, 6:50 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+kOe0--ft20dKzbHDMorh1QPxLAnoC-gFwrUWxuao8r2fVKDA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Phil
Race <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:philip.race@oracle.com" target="_blank">philip.race@oracle.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Hi,<br>
<br>
So your real complaint isn't the failure itself, but
that jtreg bothers<br>
to check directories you aren't even running tests from,
and<br>
that is a time tax whether such clashes exist or not ?<br>
Seems a reasonable point ... if I'm running a single
Image I/O test<br>
jtreg still finds the java/awt clash and that can't be
"free".<br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That was _one_ of my complaints!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm also unhappy that jdk9/dev got poisoned by
jdk9/client. Having subforests is supposed to prevent
that sort of breakage via proper release engineering.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'm _not_ unhappy about the mistake itself - it's a
classic software engineering trap we all fall into
eventually if we do software long enough.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>