8382264: Refactor java.logging TestNG tests to use JUnit

[dfuch]

Please find here a small change that converts java.logging TestNG tests to use JUnit. Most java.logging tests are plain jtreg tests, so this is a small set.

---

• I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the OpenJDK Interim AI Policy.

---

Progress

• Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

• JDK-8382264: Refactor java.logging TestNG tests to use JUnit (Sub-task - P4)

Reviewers

• SendaoYan (@sendaoYan - Committer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/30769/head:pull/30769
$ git checkout pull/30769

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/30769
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/30769/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 30769

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 30769

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30769.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back dfuchs! 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 change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

[openjdk]

@dfuch The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 02: Full - Incremental (45e876f8)
• 01: Full - Incremental (3777f41d)
• 00: Full (260c6d6d)

[Marcono1234]

Does this intentionally not use ${test.main.class}? (which you changed in the other test classes)

[dfuch]

Good catch. Fixed.

[sendaoYan]

LogRecordThreadIdTest previously used TestNG @BeforeTest, which runs before each @test method, so each test started with freshly constructed LogRecord instances. With JUnit @BeforeAll + static fields, the same instances are reused. The assertions still look safe because each test overwrites the state it cares about, but could you confirm this was intentional? If you want to preserve the old “fresh records per test” behavior, @beforeeach (possibly with non-static fields) would be closer to TestNG.

[dfuch]

As far as I understand @BeforeTest means that the method will be run before any test in the test group. If there is no test group, the test group is the class. Which means that BeforeAll/BeforeTest/BeforeClass are all equivalent here. That said there's no real reason to use a setup method here. I simply removed it.