Bug#1041282: jtreg6 - okay to upload upstream version 6.2+1?

[Vladimir Petko]

Hi,

Thank you!!!

Yes, the patch is cumulative and contains all the relevant changes.

 Existing jtreg6 version (6.1+2-1~deb10u1) in buster is sufficient to
rebuild openjdk-11 and -17 with a number of failing tests. If we
update to 6.2, those tests should start passing, but the update is not
mandatory. I have seen some pull requests[1] that backport jtreg 7
compatibility to openjdk-17, so we might need to switch to it at some
point and this will also require testng 7.

Best Regards,
 Vladimir.

[1] https://github.com/openjdk/jdk17u-dev/pull/1672




On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 3:58 PM tony mancill <tmancill at debian.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 09:49:01AM +1200, Vladimir Petko wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >  Upgrading to 6.2 does not introduce any jtreg regressions in
> > openjdk-11 and -17.
>
> Hi Vladimir,
>
> Thank you for your response.  The upload is ready, but I want to check
> once more with the list whether there are any concerns.  The build-dep
> on libtestng7-java in this upload will require introducing testng7 [1]
> to old-old-stable (buster) if we need the updated jtreg6 there.
>
> Also, I believe the patch you provided addresses of Debian #1036065 and
> #1036066 [2,3] too.  Can you confirm?
>
> Thank you,
> tony
>
> [1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/testng7
> [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036065
> [3] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1036066
>
> > On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 7:06 AM tony mancill <tmancill at debian.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 09:28:39AM +1200, Vladimir Petko wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >  The build.xml is not supported by the upstream, so I have updated the
> > > > patch to include rule changes to use the provided Makefile[1].
> > > >
> > > > Changes:
> > > >   * Use Makefile to build jtreg (LP: #2031041).
> > > >     - Use --release option in Makefile compile options.
> > > >     - d/p/*: drop build.xml patches.
> > > >     - d/control: add libguice-java, zip.
> > >
> > > Hello Vladimir, hi Emmanuel:
> > >
> > > Vladimir, thank you for this patch (and others).  I applied it to the
> > > current source repo and rebuild all of the build r-deps before I
> > > realized that the source repo contains 6.2+1 [1] (not 6.1+2), which
> > > hasn't been uploaded.
> > >
> > > Are there any considerations or concerns about going ahead with an
> > > upload of 6.2+1?  As I said, I was able to build openjdk-11, -17, and
> > > -19 with that version.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > tony
> > >
> > > [1] https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/jtreg/-/commit/18fe40fc470b04bc735b425bba250db61340fcb3