On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 18:54:51 GMT, Alan Bateman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> My use of "default runtime" was to distinguish it from opening other jimage >> files via URI, which wouldn't be expected match the runtime classes. >> >> Instead of "JrtFileSystemClassParityTest" how about >> "ClassResourcesParityTest". >> >> Having preview in the name is a bit odd to me, since in one invocation it's >> not using preview mode. >> >> Also, it does need to translate the IOException because it's called as a >> lambda via a method reference. > > Can you try changing the test descriptions so that the first run uses: > > @test id=no-enable-preview > @requires !java.enablePreview > > and the second run uses: > > @test id=enable-preview > @enablePreview > > I haven't tested it but it should mean the first run isn't selected when > testing with preview features enabled (avoids adding it to > ProblemList-enable-preview.txt). The second will avoid needing to explicitly > use --enable-preview. > > ClassResourcesParityTest is probably okay in the sense that it tests that > the resource lookup will locate the same class bytes as class loading . > > I think drop "default runtime" from the description as it hints of > alternatives or some other install. The test will use the JDK under test, and > this test exercises the file system view of this runtime. There is nothing > images or exploded build specific. Done. Changes tested locally and I'll start a remote test run now. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/2032#discussion_r2829932272
