Latest webrev:
http://chhegar.ie.oracle.com/chhegar/repos/jdk9/dev/dev/jdk/8034174/webrev.01/webrev/
-Chris.
On 24/02/14 14:12, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 24/02/14 14:09, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 24/02/14 10:42, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 23/02/14 08:55, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 22 Feb 2014, a
Chris,
You probably need to modify
jdk/make/mapfiles/libnet/mapfile-vers
-Dmitry
On 2014-02-24 18:19, Chris Hegarty wrote:
> On 24/02/14 14:12, Michael McMahon wrote:
>> On 24/02/14 14:09, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>> On 24/02/14 10:42, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 23/02/14 08:55, Chris Hegarty w
On 24/02/14 14:12, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 24/02/14 14:09, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 24/02/14 10:42, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 23/02/14 08:55, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 22 Feb 2014, at 17:23, Dmitry Samersoff
wrote:
Chris,
Didn't look to windows part. Unix part looks good for me. See also
be
On 24/02/14 14:09, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 24/02/14 10:42, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 23/02/14 08:55, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 22 Feb 2014, at 17:23, Dmitry Samersoff
wrote:
Chris,
Didn't look to windows part. Unix part looks good for me. See also
below.
I'm a bit concerned because of mixing
On 24/02/14 10:42, Michael McMahon wrote:
On 23/02/14 08:55, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 22 Feb 2014, at 17:23, Dmitry Samersoff
wrote:
Chris,
Didn't look to windows part. Unix part looks good for me. See also
below.
I'm a bit concerned because of mixing NET_* abstractions and direct call
to OS
On 23/02/14 08:55, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 22 Feb 2014, at 17:23, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
Chris,
Didn't look to windows part. Unix part looks good for me. See also below.
I'm a bit concerned because of mixing NET_* abstractions and direct call
to OS functions. It might be better to create NE
Thanks for your comments Bernd.
On 22 Feb 2014, at 14:03, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> Am 22.02.2014 um 10:33 schrieb Alan Bateman :
>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8034174/webrev.00/webrev/
>> Thank for you for doing this, it's long over due.
>
> Hm, I actually like to have
On 22 Feb 2014, at 17:23, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Didn't look to windows part. Unix part looks good for me. See also below.
>
> I'm a bit concerned because of mixing NET_* abstractions and direct call
> to OS functions. It might be better to create NET_socket etc.
Me too. It is al
On 22 Feb 2014, at 09:33, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 22/02/2014 08:29, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Interruptible I/O on Solaris has been highly problematic and the long
>> standing plan has been to remove it from the JDK. In JDK6 the VM option
>> UseVMInterruptibleIO was introduced to allow develope
Chris,
Didn't look to windows part. Unix part looks good for me. See also below.
I'm a bit concerned because of mixing NET_* abstractions and direct call
to OS functions. It might be better to create NET_socket etc.
We use NET_GetSockOpt/NET_SetSockOpt in one places and plain os
functions in oth
On 22/02/2014 14:03, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Hm, I actually like to have that JVM_ abstraction layer. Looks like it is now
replaced by NET_ in some parts, do we really want to remove it in others? (the
JVM_IO_ERR beeing an obvious advantage)
Support for green threads went away when we moved to
Hello,
> Am 22.02.2014 um 10:33 schrieb Alan Bateman :
>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8034174/webrev.00/webrev/
> Thank for you for doing this, it's long over due.
Hm, I actually like to have that JVM_ abstraction layer. Looks like it is now
replaced by NET_ in some parts, do we really
On 22/02/2014 08:29, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Interruptible I/O on Solaris has been highly problematic and the long standing plan has
been to remove it from the JDK. In JDK6 the VM option UseVMInterruptibleIO was introduced
to allow developers/customers experiment with disabling it. In JDK7 the def
13 matches
Mail list logo
