Some regression test cases for java.util.TimeZone and java.text.Format are FAILED in b08 and b09 on Windows(I confirmed this problem on Win2k japanese, Windows XP professional japanese and Windows98 japanese).
The problem is reproducible with the Client VM and not reproducible with the Server VM using b08 or b09.
This is not reproducible with the Client VM/-Xint using b08 or b09.
This is not reproducible with b07.
This is not reproducible on Solaris.

Regression Test Cases:
java/text/Format/TimeZoneNameTest.java
java/text/Format/DateFormatRoundTripTest.java
java/util/TimeZone/TimeZoneBoundaryTest.java:
java/util/TimeZone/TimeZoneRegression.java:

To reproduce,

1. Extract attached b09_reg_err.tar(There are 4 test cases in it).
2. Execute the test cases with the Client VM:
java TimeZoneNameTest
java DateFormatRoundTripTest
java TimeZoneBoundaryTest
java TimeZoneRegression
Then, the you can see the error messages as below;

**********************************************************************
***java.text.Format***
U:\hopper\b09_reg_err>java TimeZoneNameTest
TimeZoneNameTest {
  Test4112924 {
    Australia/Broken_Hill: wrong long name: "Central Standard Time (South Austra
lia/New South Wales)" (expected "Central Summer Time (South Australia/New South
Wales)")
    Uncaught exception thrown in test method Test4112924
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Uncaught exception thrown
 in test method Test4112924
        at IntlTest.err(IntlTest.java:160)
        at IntlTest.errln(IntlTest.java:165)
        at IntlTest.run(IntlTest.java:113)
        at TimeZoneNameTest.main(TimeZoneNameTest.java:59)

U:\hopper\b09_reg_err>java DateFormatRoundTripTest
DateFormatRoundTripTest {
  TestDateFormatRoundTrip {
    FAIL: Pattern: dd MMMM, yyyy z hh:mm:ss a, Locale: ar_MA
      Initial date (ms): 909305999000
     Date matched in 1, wanted 2
     String matched in 2, wanted 1
        \u65e5 10 25 17:59:59.000 JST 1998 \u897f\u66a6 F> 25 \u0623\u0643\u062a
\u0648\u0628\u0631, 1998 PDT 01:59:59 \u0635
     P> \u65e5 10 25 17:59:59.000 JST 1998 \u897f\u66a6 F> 25 \u0623\u0643\u062a
\u0648\u0628\u0631, 1998 PST 12:59:59 \u0635 d==
     P> \u65e5 10 25 17:59:59.000 JST 1998 \u897f\u66a6 F> 25 \u0623\u0643\u062a
\u0648\u0628\u0631, 1998 PST 12:59:59 \u0635 d== s==
    Uncaught exception thrown in test method TestDateFormatRoundTrip
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Uncaught exception thrown
 in test method TestDateFormatRoundTrip

***java.util.TimeZone***
U:\hopper\b09_reg_err>java TimeZoneBoundaryTest
TimeZoneBoundaryTest {
  TestBoundaries {
    FAIL: Expected boundary at 859653000000
    Uncaught exception thrown in test method TestBoundaries
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Uncaught exception thrown
 in test method TestBoundaries
        at IntlTest.err(IntlTest.java:160)
        at IntlTest.errln(IntlTest.java:165)
        at IntlTest.run(IntlTest.java:113)
        at TimeZoneBoundaryTest.main(TimeZoneBoundaryTest.java:37)

U:\hopper\b09_reg_err>java TimeZoneRegression
TimeZoneRegression {
  Test4073209 Passed
  Test4126678 Passed
  Test4154650 Passed
  Test4154542 Passed
  Test4162593 Passed
  Test4151429 Passed
  Test4096952 Passed
  Test4073215 Passed
  Test4173604 {
    Saw 0 transitions; should have seen 4
    Uncaught exception thrown in test method Test4173604
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: Uncaught exception thrown
 in test method Test4173604
        at IntlTest.err(IntlTest.java:160)
        at IntlTest.errln(IntlTest.java:165)
        at IntlTest.run(IntlTest.java:113)
        at TimeZoneRegression.main(TimeZoneRegression.java:14)
**********************************************************************
And please execute the cases with -Xint or -server.
You can see the cases are all PASSED.

I found a Bug 4666859 filed against b08, which seems similar to this problem though it have been closed already.
I put the BugID in See Also field.
The problem I found seems similar to 4666859, so I file this problem as the same Category/Subcategory as 4666859.
If this is not appropriate, please change it.

###@###.### 2002-04-19