RFR: 8164805: Fail to create a MR modular JAR with a versioned entry in base-versioned empty package
mandy.chung at oracle.com
Mon Oct 24 21:13:31 UTC 2016
> On Oct 24, 2016, at 1:39 PM, Steve Drach <steve.drach at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> There is a new webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8164805/webrev.01/
>> Thanks for refactoring and adding the findConcealedPackages method. What I actually meant was to move out this line:
>> concealedPackages = findConcealedPackages(rd);
>> to probably before calling addExtendedModuleAttributes(moduleInfos) above line 342 and 1101.
> I tried that and decided it was non-optimal because we’d have to construct the ModuleDescriptor from the modInfos twice in succession. Let's compromise here, okay?
OK. It wasn’t clear to me that you considered that. It’s fine to leave it for a future clean up.
>> 2014 .filter(p -> !p.equals("”))
>> For a modular JAR, there should be no unnamed package. I think the jar tool should fail if it detects an unnamed package. Your test does not have any unnamed package - how did you find this?
> the modularJar/Basic test found a bug. Then when I was fixing the bug in toPackageNames I noticed it could return unnamed packages (“”). And in fact there are some, a few, classes that aren’t in a package. Jar tool shouldn’t fail with unnamed packages.
I meant for modular JAR.
> They could even exist in a modular multi-release jar when the module-info class is only in a versioned directory.
module-info.class should be filtered before calling toPackageName.
> I guess it should fail if a class in an unnamed package is in a module, although I’m not even sure about that.
More information about the core-libs-dev