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

Magnus Ihse Bursie magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com
Mon May 25 07:52:58 UTC 2015

On 2015-05-22 16:02, Roger Riggs wrote:

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.

The current JEP-223 sandbox does indeed have a check in configure that build numbers cannot exceed 255.

/Magnus

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