On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:14:31 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH` when
> referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit. Currently,
>
Hi all!
Will the following snippet stop working after the JEP 486 has been
integrated? If so, will there be any replacement to get a CodeSource?
```
getClass().getProtectionDomain().getCodeSource().getLocation()
```
Best regards,
Thiago
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:52:23 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> As this stands (modulo my other comments) this change is mostly OK. Using
>> the SOFT_MAX value within java.base is fine. Using SOFT_MAX within
>> java.base-related tests is a little suspicious, because it requires the
>> addition of di
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 16:18:13 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> There ~are two~ is one change~s~:
>>
>> 1. In `jarsigner -verify`, check a .SF file contains un-existing entries and
>> print them out as
>>
>> Warning: nonexistent signed entries detected: [a]
>>
>> ~2. In `JarSigner::sign0`, when creat
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
The test
**sun/security/tools/jarsigner/PreserveRawManifestEntryAndDigest.java** may
fail with the following exception:
test PreserveRawManifestEntryAndDigest.testNameImmediatelyContinued(): failure
java.lang.AssertionError: "s k 300 Tue Jun 25 10:20:16 GMT+07:00 2024
META-INF/MANIFEST.MF" sho
