On Tue, 20 Dec 2022 19:05:13 GMT, Bill Huang <bhu...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> test/jdk/javax/crypto/CryptoPermissions/InconsistentEntries.java line 52:
>>
>>> 50: private static final String JDK_HOME =
>>> System.getProperty("test.jdk");
>>> 51: private static final String TEST_SRC =
>>> System.getProperty("test.src");
>>> 52: private static final Path POLICY_DIR = Paths.get(JDK_HOME, "conf",
>>> "security",
>>
>> This doesn't looks like a safe Test to be automated. Can it create conflict
>> with any other existing Test requiring "testlimited" with
>> default_local.policy? This need to be verified. Also changing anything
>> inside an installed JDK probably not a good choice. It's just a thought from
>> my side and it could be different for others.
>
> Good points. I searched the entire repo and this is the only instance that
> uses the "testlimited" with default_local.policy. Looking over the logic, the
> test sets the crypto.policy property to "testlimited". So I am wondering if
> the "testlimited" is created for test purposes. If so, are we allowed to
> rename "testlimited" to be more specific, eg. "testcryptoperms"?
> `Security.setProperty("crypto.policy", "testlimited");`
As long as it create no conflict with other Tests at runtime.. i am fine to
keep it same.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10637
