On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 18:03:12 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in
>> the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the
>> effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the
>> u
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 16:46:53 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> Not specific to JEP 486, this should be done as part of a different issue.
>
> agreed
there were many tests modified in javax_swing in this PR where the author tag
is removed, only this is missed so I pointed it out...
-
PR Rev
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 16:44:59 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
>> This should be addressed in a more general separate task, and not part of
>> this PR since it does not have anything to do with the changes in this JEP.
>
> Agreed. This is not a "clean up / update tests" task.
> If it is a change on some lin
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 11:41:47 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> I see there is a `COPYING` file in the same directory as the header files.
> Does it need any update?
That file has been the same, so no need to update it.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21552#issuecomment-2430
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:29:38 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan
wrote:
>> Sean Mullan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 97 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk-sandbox/jep486' into JDK-8338411
>> - Change apiNo
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:16:38 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan
wrote:
>> Sean Mullan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 97 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk-sandbox/jep486' into JDK-8338411
>> - Change apiNo
`SSLAlgorithmDecomposer.decomposes(CipherSuite.KeyExchange keyExchange)` method
is missing the `null` case: TLSv1.3 cipher suites with ECDHE being used for
both key exchange and authentication have `null` for KeyExchange object.
-
Commit messages:
- 8342838: ECDHE algorithm can't b
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 14:34:30 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in
> the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the
> effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the
> unuse
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 15:22:08 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> test/jdk/javax/swing/JComboBox/8080972/TestBasicComboBoxEditor.java line 26:
>>
>>> 24: import javax.swing.SwingUtilities;
>>> 25: import javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicComboBoxEditor;
>>> 26: /*
>>
>> I think we have finally decided that jtr
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8336665
Mark Powers has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
more precise comment
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20528/files
- new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 14:27:19 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> The CRL is being constructed from a fuzzed data input stream. All I know is
>> that the name in the CertificateIssuerExtension looks like an x509.OIDName
>> in the first test, and in the second test it looks like an x509.X400Address.
>>
>
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 08:09:01 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan
wrote:
>> Sean Mullan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 97 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk-sandbox/jep486' into JDK-8338411
>> - Change apiNo
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 15:45:09 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` tags to crypto and security APIs
>> in `java.base`.
>>
>> This was authored and proposed as #13336 by @jonathan-gibbons as part of an
>> effort to [add `@spec` tags and an external specifica
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 12:51:45 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
>> test/jdk/sun/security/x509/X509CRLImpl/UnexpectedCCE.java line 46:
>>
>>> 44: // "class sun.security.x509.OIDName cannot be cast
>>> 45: // to class sun.security.x509.X500Name"
>>> 46: byte[] encoded_1 = Base64.getDe
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 17:06:03 GMT, Martin Balao wrote:
>> In addition to the goals, scope, motivation, specification and requirement
>> notes in [JDK-8315487](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315487), we
>> would like to describe the most relevant decisions taken during the
>> implementation
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 18:18:12 GMT, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
> This patch remove access to the shared variable to fix scalability issue in
> the multithread environment. According to testing by the
> specjvm2008::crypto.rsa the one thread performance reduced for less than 1%
> while the score for
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:50:13 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote:
>> Sean Mullan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 97 commits:
>>
>> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'jdk-sandbox/jep486' into JDK-8338411
>> - Change apiNote t
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 17:28:42 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Mark Powers has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> more precise exception message
>
> test/jdk/sun/security/x509/X509CRLImpl/UnexpectedCCE.java line 46:
>
>> 44: /
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 09:40:35 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> > Aren't the dt_shmem and jdwp changes related to HotSpot?
>
> Nope. That's core-svc - the non-hotspot side of serviceability. :)
Oh, well I guess you learn something new everyday :)
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/
> Several tests currently use weak key and salt sizes. Since the purpose of
> these tests is not to evaluate weak keys, they can be updated to use stronger
> keys length (2048-bits) and stronger Salt (16 bytes). This PR does not intend
> to update the tests to use stronger algorithms.
>
> There
> Several tests are identified to use weak key parameters (prime modulus,
> private/public values) and certs with weak keys. As these tests purpose is
> not to exercise weak keys, these are updated in this PR to use a modulus with
> 2048-bit, base 2 and certificates with key size 2048
Fernando
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 01:43:50 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
> Aren't the dt_shmem and jdwp changes related to HotSpot?
Nope. That's core-svc - the non-hotspot side of serviceability. :)
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21616#issuecomment-2428793636
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main ch
34 matches
Mail list logo
