On 22 March 2010 15:41, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 18 March 2010 21:12, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
>
> B
On 18 March 2010 21:12, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
>>>
>>> I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more tha
Andrew John Hughes wrote:
On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more than the
reliance on an external server is the reliance on cacerts. While cacerts (or
equivalent) is not
On 18 March 2010 20:56, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
>
> I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more than the
> reliance on an external server is the reliance on cacerts. While cacerts (or
> equivalent) is not part of OpenJDK I d
Brad, Pavel, Andrew,
I'm also not comfortable with this test, but what bothers me more than
the reliance on an external server is the reliance on cacerts. While
cacerts (or equivalent) is not part of OpenJDK I don't think it makes
sense adding a test to OpenJDK that has a reliance on it.
For
On 18 March 2010 18:40, Brad Wetmore wrote:
>
> I have a couple important tasks to finish ASAP, so if there is more
> discussion, I'll have to jump in sometime next week, but wanted to add
> one thing before anything was done:
>
> Pavel wrote:
>> And we can use other URL if verisign.com is problem
I have a couple important tasks to finish ASAP, so if there is more
discussion, I'll have to jump in sometime next week, but wanted to add
one thing before anything was done:
Pavel wrote:
> And we can use other URL if verisign.com is problematic.
We've tried to limit the reliance on servers outs
On 18 March 2010 15:13, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>
>> This has been posted about before; OpenJDK currently can't bootstrap
>> itself because it doesn't have a working cacerts store (the JAXP URL
>> uses https).
>>
>> I don't know how to solve this; we can certainly have the c
On 18 March 2010 15:07, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
>
>
> Sean Mullan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Security folk:
>>> Do we currently have any tests with a dependency on cacerts?
>>
>> yes, but they would be in the closed tests.
>
> So we have your own non public tests for t
Sean Mullan wrote:
Security folk:
Do we currently have any tests with a dependency on cacerts?
yes, but they would be in the closed tests.
So we have your own non public tests for this. Maybe RedHat should take
a similar approach then.
-Chris.
--Sean
On 18 March 2010 14:57, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
>>
>> Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
>>>
>>> Alan Bateman wrote:
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> please review new regression test for java.net.*
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
Alan Bateman wrote:
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
Hi,
please review new regression test for java.net.* API. This test
check if the cacerts keytool database is configured properly and SSL
is really working. The test should
Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
Alan Bateman wrote:
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
Hi,
please review new regression test for java.net.* API. This test check
if the cacerts keytool database is configured properly and SSL is
really working. The test should not fail if SSL is worki
Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
:
Alan is correct there are already tests for SSL/Https in javax.net,
but I believe these use self signed certs, no dependency on cacerts.
OK, in that case adding a new test make sense. The test/java/net tree is
probably not the best place t
On 18 March 2010 14:28, Christopher Hegarty -Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Alan Bateman wrote:
>>
>> Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> please review new regression test for java.net.* API. This test check if
>>> the cacerts keytool database is configured properly and SSL is really
>>>
Alan Bateman wrote:
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
Hi,
please review new regression test for java.net.* API. This test check
if the cacerts keytool database is configured properly and SSL is
really working. The test should not fail if SSL is working (in other
case it simply throws IOException). Webr
On 18 March 2010 13:56, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> please review new regression test for java.net.* API. This test check if
>> the cacerts keytool database is configured properly and SSL is really
>> working. The test should not fail if SSL is working (in other ca
Pavel Tisnovsky wrote:
Hi,
please review new regression test for java.net.* API. This test check
if the cacerts keytool database is configured properly and SSL is
really working. The test should not fail if SSL is working (in other
case it simply throws IOException). Webrev si available at
h
18 matches
Mail list logo
