Hi Ivan,
> On Jun 12, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>
> On 6/12/19 10:02 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>> Actually, never mind, I am being completely lame here: both NET_ThrowNew()
>> and the Windows function LocalFree() are robust to a NULL-valued buf so I
>> think we can just remove
On 6/12/19 10:02 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
Actually, never mind, I am being completely lame here: both
NET_ThrowNew() and the Windows function LocalFree() are robust to a
NULL-valued buf so I think we can just remove the n > 0 or buf == NULL
check altogether.
That's true, assuming that you
Actually, never mind, I am being completely lame here: both NET_ThrowNew() and
the Windows function LocalFree() are robust to a NULL-valued buf so I think we
can just remove the n > 0 or buf == NULL check altogether.
Sorry for the noise: I should have checked this first.
Thanks,
Brian
> On Ju
Hi Ivan,
I am perhaps beating a dead horse here, but how about this instead?
if (n > 0) {
NET_ThrowNew(env, err, buf);
LocalFree(buf);
} else {
NET_ThrowNew(env, err, "FormatMessage failed");
Hi,
Please find below a patch that fixes
java/net/Authenticator and java/net/CookieHandler to use
the loopback address - or the local host address if needed,
instead of the wildcard whenever that is possible:
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dfuchs/webrev_8225578/webrev.00/
JBS:
https://bugs
Hi Daniel,
On 12/06/19 7:30 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Hi Jaikiran,
>
> On 12/06/2019 13:41, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> I decided to give it a try and host it on cr.openjdk.java.net. I have
>> now published the webrev for this patch, here
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jpai/8217705/00/webrev/
>>
>> Thi
Hi Jaikiran,
On 12/06/2019 13:41, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
I decided to give it a try and host it on cr.openjdk.java.net. I have
now published the webrev for this patch, here
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jpai/8217705/00/webrev/
This is my first usage of this tool, so if there's something that I
misse
Hello Daniel,
On 12/06/19 3:42 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Hi Jaikiran,
>
> I have eyeballed your patch and on the surface I'd say it looks
> good to me. I'll need to have a deeper look at the full code
> after importing it but I'm not expecting any surprise.
>
> I can work as your sponsor for this.
Michael,
On 11/06/2019 18:14, Michael McMahon wrote:
...
Updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8216417/webrev.4/
This looks very good.
-Chris.
Looks good Chris!
-- daniel
On 12/06/2019 11:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
The fix for JDK-8224477 missed the `@` in a couple of code tags.
diff --git a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketImpl.java
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketImpl.java
--- a/src/java.base/share/classes/ja
On 12/06/2019 11:21, Chris Hegarty wrote:
The fix for JDK-8224477 missed the `@` in a couple of code tags.
Looks good.
The fix for JDK-8224477 missed the `@` in a couple of code tags.
diff --git a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketImpl.java
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketImpl.java
--- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketImpl.java
+++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketI
Hi Jaikiran,
I have eyeballed your patch and on the surface I'd say it looks
good to me. I'll need to have a deeper look at the full code
after importing it but I'm not expecting any surprise.
I can work as your sponsor for this.
Thanks for adding the new 3 digits check and finding
the appropria
13 matches
Mail list logo
