RFR 9: 8074818: Resolve disabled warnings for libjava (original) (raw)

Roger Riggs Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com
Fri May 22 14:02:47 UTC 2015

Hi Alan,

The change to make the assert about the build numbers in getVersionInfo should be a different issue. Perhaps it makes sense to do that as part of the JEP 223: New Version-String Scheme that is specific to the Oracle JDK.

Thanks, Roger

On 5/22/2015 2:55 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:

On 22/05/2015 01:42, Roger Riggs wrote: Oops, got the wrong host:

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-fix-all-warnings-8074818/ Issues: 8074818: Resolve disabled warnings for libjava 8080007: Stop ignoring warnings for libjava Thanks, Roger In JDKGetVersionInfo0 then I wonder if we should change this assert to be a fatal error on product builds. Periodically people set the build to numbers > 255 and often only see issues when they use a fastdebug build. Th rest looks okay to me. I don't particularly like the IOEFORMAT in ProcessImpl.c but I think other areas have done similar to deal with this warning. ConcurrentPReadermd.c is being removed in another patch under review at the moment so might be gone before you push. -Alan.

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list