On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 14:33:12 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> > The CSR for this change has been approved. I plan to integrate this
> > tomorrow pending a final tier2 run.
>
> Is this comment aimed at another PR?
Haha, indeeed. This was for #22177 which is now integrated. Too many tabs :-)
-
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 19:30:35 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> The CSR for this change has been approved. I plan to integrate this tomorrow
> pending a final tier2 run.
Is this comment aimed at another PR?
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22205#issuecomment-2485884259
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 12:40:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to use a static property already resolved instead of calling
> `System.getProperty()`.
The CSR for this change has been approved. I plan to integrate this tomorrow
pending a final tier2 run.
-
PR Comment: htt
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 15:25:06 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> Drive by observation: In java.base, there are four similar instances in
> `ImageReaderFactory.JAVA_HOME`, `SystemImage::findHome`,
> `CDS::dumpSharedArchive` and `DomainName::getPubSuffixStream`.
Good find: Let's fix them under this iss
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 12:40:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to use a static property already resolved instead of calling
> `System.getProperty()`.
Drive by observation: In java.base, there are four similar instances in
`ImageReaderFactory.JAVA_HOME`, `SystemImage::findHome`,
`CDS:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 12:40:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to use a static property already resolved instead of calling
> `System.getProperty()`.
Looks good. Thanks
-
Marked as reviewed by rriggs (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22205#pullreque
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 12:40:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to use a static property already resolved instead of calling
> `System.getProperty()`.
This looks okay, makes it immune to crazy code that changes java.home.
-
Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer).
PR Revie
