> On Jan 15, 2019, at 12:48 PM, Rachel Greenham <rac...@strangenoises.org> > wrote: > > On 15/01/2019 17:36, Michael Hall wrote: >>> On Jan 15, 2019, at 10:55 AM, Rachel Greenham <rac...@strangenoises.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> My understanding was that this particular jdk build only exists for the >>> sake of getting jpackage out there into our hands (hence my point about >>> putting it out as a jlinked app instead), >> True, which is a little different in and of itself, providing a JDK for a >> single command. I’m not that familiar yet with what jlink can do. How would >> it’s being a launchable app help in testing a command line tool? Is there >> some new magic way I haven’t heard of yet that jlink provides so that >> invoking something command line launches an app with the enclosing JDK? > > you could create the jlinked app from the jdk they provide, something like > (using the jlink in that jdk): > > jlink --add-modules jdk.jpackage --output jpackage > > This gives you a trimmed-down jre with just the modules that jdk.jpackage > depends on. In bin is a jpackage executable. So you'd call > jpackage/bin/jpackage <opts>. There's a bunch of other executables there > (including java and javac) but they're only there because they belong in > dependent modules. > > Assuming it has everything it needs, it would probably be functionally the > same to use that or to use the jpackage in that jdk, but it's a third of the > size, and providing it in that manner may better communicate that that's all > that it's for, and not to try to use it as a complete jdk in its own right. I > imagine you could also just remove the other binaries in bin so it could be > safely added to your PATH and not be interfering with your using jdk. > > Caveat: I haven't tested any of that, except the jlink itself, and seeing the > resulting jpackage give me its --help output. :-) Just explaining what jlink > is for in this context. > > -- > Rachel
Thanks for the answer. I still have to do more with these tools including jlink myself. Mike Hall
