> On 9 Sep 2016, at 19:35, Rob McKenna wrote:
>
> To be explicit, new webrev here:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/6947916/webrev.03/
Looks fine.
-Chris.
P.S. I’m ok if you want to explicitly delete the file either, just use the test
library
FileUtils convenient method.
> -Rob
To be explicit, new webrev here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/6947916/webrev.03/
-Rob
On 09/09/16 07:03, Rob McKenna wrote:
> Chris just pointed out to me that the test.classes prefix on the jar path is
> unnecessary. He also mentioned that jtreg would clear up the scratch
> direct
Chris just pointed out to me that the test.classes prefix on the jar path is
unnecessary. He also mentioned that jtreg would clear up the scratch directory
so the deleteOnExit wouldn't be needed either.
-Rob
On 09/09/16 05:02, Rob McKenna wrote:
> Will do
>
> -Rob
>
> On 09/09/1
Will do
-Rob
On 09/09/16 11:00, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Looks ok.
>
> Its also a good practice to cleanup the file. (File.deleteOnExit).
>
> Roger
>
>
> On 9/9/2016 9:23 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
> >Hey Chris,
> >
> >Apologies, I'm guilty of "just doing what adjacent tests do"
Hi Rob,
Looks ok.
Its also a good practice to cleanup the file. (File.deleteOnExit).
Roger
On 9/9/2016 9:23 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
Hey Chris,
Apologies, I'm guilty of "just doing what adjacent tests do" here.
That shell script is actually there in the test source already, but generating
Hey Chris,
Apologies, I'm guilty of "just doing what adjacent tests do" here.
That shell script is actually there in the test source already, but generating
the jar from the test means theres no need to use it or to check in a binary.
Thanks for picking me up!
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/
