8253702: BigSur version number reported as 10.16, should be 11.nn

[omikhaltsova]

I'd like to backport JDK-8253702 to jdk8u in order to fix the incorrect version detection for macOS.

The patch applied manually due to the location difference:
src/java.base/macosx/native/libjava/java_props_macosx.c (source)
jdk/src/solaris/native/java/lang/java_props_macosx.c (destination)
But it's small and low risk. The changes are related only to one function void setOSNameAndVersion(..) within the single file. The patch is identical to the original one.

Tested with a simple test printing the OS version on macOS Big Sur:

public class Main {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println(System.getProperty("os.version"));
    }
}

---

Progress

• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

• JDK-8253702: BigSur version number reported as 10.16, should be 11.nn

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev pull/125/head:pull/125
$ git checkout pull/125

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/125
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev pull/125/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 125

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 125

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev/pull/125.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back omikhaltcova! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

[openjdk]

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

[omikhaltsova]

/issue add JDK-8269850

[openjdk]

@omikhaltsova
Adding additional issue to issue list: 8269850: Most JDK releases report macOS version 12 as 10.16 instead of 12.0.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (637821e5)
• 00: Full (af41f610)

[jerboaa]

Why is this handling two backports with a single patch? You can do dependent prs if you wish, but please keep the patches separate. Thanks!

[omikhaltsova]

Thanks for taking a look! It seemed to me a good idea to backport these 2 small patches together because they fix the similar bugs, locate in the same place and it'll be easy to review them also together. Anyway I will separate them if it's better.

[omikhaltsova]

/issue remove JDK-8269850

[openjdk]

@omikhaltsova
Removing additional issue from issue list: 8269850.

[openjdk-notifier]

@omikhaltsova Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it invalidates existing review comments. All changes will be squashed into a single commit automatically when integrating. See OpenJDK Developers’ Guide for more information.

[jerboaa]

Path changes only, marking as clean.

[jerboaa]

/clean

[openjdk]

@jerboaa This backport pull request is now marked as clean

[openjdk]

@omikhaltsova This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8253702: BigSur version number reported as 10.16, should be 11.nn

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 4 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 861ac32: 8293828: JFR: jfr/event/oldobject/TestClassLoaderLeak.java still fails when GC cycles are not happening
• 4a25b00: 8274563: jfr/event/oldobject/TestClassLoaderLeak.java fails when GC cycles are not happening
• 859c057: 8148005: One byte may be corrupted by get_datetime_string()
• a93344b: 8294863: Enable partial tier1 testing in GHA for JDK8

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

[omikhaltsova]

/integrate

[openjdk]

@omikhaltsova
Your change (at version 637821e) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

[yan-too]

/sponsor

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 05b249d.
Since your change was applied there have been 4 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 861ac32: 8293828: JFR: jfr/event/oldobject/TestClassLoaderLeak.java still fails when GC cycles are not happening
• 4a25b00: 8274563: jfr/event/oldobject/TestClassLoaderLeak.java fails when GC cycles are not happening
• 859c057: 8148005: One byte may be corrupted by get_datetime_string()
• a93344b: 8294863: Enable partial tier1 testing in GHA for JDK8

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@yan-too @omikhaltsova Pushed as commit 05b249d.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.