This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] PR46774: Calling Policy.setPolicy with a new Policy object has no effect on the default SecurityManager

From: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
To: java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 09:39:18 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR46774: Calling Policy.setPolicy with a new Policy object has no effect on the default SecurityManager
References: <20101215014504.GF8123@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk>

On 12/15/2010 01:45 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:

Ok for trunk? Should this be backported to any older branches?

2010-12-13 Andrew John Hughes<ahughes@redhat.com>

	PR libgcj/46774
	* libjava/java/security/VMAccessController.java:
	(DEFAULT_CONTEXT): Create ProtectionDomain with
	four argument constructor (arguments are the same
	as those implied by the two argument constructor).
	(getContext()): Create ProtectionDomain instances
	with four argument constructor using a null Principal
	array (as before) but including the classloader, which
	was always null before.


OK, thanks.  I don't have any strong opinion about whether this
should be back-ported to older branches, but 4.5 would be good.

Andrew.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] PR46774: Calling Policy.setPolicy with a new Policy object has no effect on the default SecurityManager
  - From: Dr Andrew John Hughes

References:
- [PATCH] PR46774: Calling Policy.setPolicy with a new Policy object has no effect on the default SecurityManager
  - From: Dr Andrew John Hughes

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]