[8u60] Request for review and approval: JDK-8074523: Java.net bundle has incorrect file version for jre/jdk

[Erik Joelsson]

Please review and approve this fix for 8u60.

On windows, native libraries and executables have version numbers 
embedded into them. These can be seen when right-clicking the binary in 
explorer, on the Details tab, as "Product version". Currently in 8 
update releases, these versions strings are inconsistent. An example:

in 8u45 b09 we have:

bin\client\jvm.dll: 8.0.0.9
bin\decora_sse.dll: 8.0.45.09
bin\deploy.dll: 8.0.450.9
bin\java.exe: 8.0.45.9

These differences fall into 4 different categories.

1. jvm.dll in hotspot is not picking up the update version at all. This 
is due to a bug in the build-infra makefile rewrite that wasn't 
discovered in JDK 8 because it didn't have an update version.

2. decora_sse.dll is part of javafx. Fixing their version scheme is out 
of scope of this fix. A separate bug for javafx would be needed.

3. deploy.dll is actually the correct one. Historically we have encoded 
the update version with an extra digit for a potential letter at the end 
of the string.

4. java.exe, and the rest of the binaries from the jdk repository lost 
their extra 0 in the build-infra makefile rewrite and it wasn't 
discovered in JDK 8.

Since we no longer use letters in update version strings, we could fix 
this by removing the extra 0. However, we have already released 8 
updates where some binaries have the extra 0. Removing it would mean 
releasing 8u60 with binaries having version numbers lower than previous 
updates. For this reason I propose fixing this by adding the 0 for JDK 
and Hotspot binaries again, and of course by supplying the correct 
variable to the hotspot makefiles so that it even gets the update 
version in there. For clarity, with this patch, the above will log like 
this:

bin\client\jvm.dll: 8.0.450.9
bin\decora_sse.dll: 8.0.45.09
bin\deploy.dll: 8.0.450.9
bin\java.exe: 8.0.450.9

Note that in JDK 9, the version number scheme is being completely 
reworked so this will not be an issue.

Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074523
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8074523/webrev.01/index.html

/Erik