Hi Michael,
On 17/04/2021 10:57 am, Michael Hall wrote:
Is there anyway to get a simple/test reference type application available that
could be used in reproducing bugs?
I had two I think potentially serious bugs that were basically not addressed
for problems in reproducing.
JDK-8263156 : [macos]: OS X application signing concerns - a sealed resource is
missing or invalid
https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=JDK-8263156
<https://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=JDK-8263156>
The command to reproduce was provided. The error appears to be in files
included in the embedded JDK not being signed. So apparently not having to do
with anything of mine. (Mentioned I now see in the comments).
As I indicate this is not a serious error for me since I am not submitting the
app to the Mac App Store but I believe this would get the app Apple rejected
for anyone who is attempting that. A show stopper for a major use case. It
seems too bad to simply close it because I missed an email asking for a
reproduce.
Note the bug referenced is closed as "incomplete" - that is a temporary
state while awaiting additional information (usually from the
submitter). If we never hear back from the submitter then it will be
closed with a different (more terminal) state. If we do hear back then
the bug gets reopened.
Cheers,
David
With a reference application I could demonstrate the error against would
eliminate the need to provide a separate reproducible test case. Quite sized
for the application in question. Such an application is actually mentioned in
the bug report comments. Could such a application be made available for
download or user reproducing - the jpackage command and arguments?
I have looked a little bit at if to see if I can figure out how to sign the
embedded jdk files. So far only accomplishing that I can no longer simply use
my name for signing but have to use my fully qualified security identity.
The question now seems to be what is in fact the difference between mine and
the, unavailable to me, reference application as to these files verifying as
correctly signed.
A second bug
JDK-8263154 : [macos]: OS X DMG builds have errors and end up incorrect
I thought a fix for this was all set to go in and was pulled. It was apparently
determined that the problem only applies if the —install-dir parameter is used
for DMG’s. Where it really makes no sense. My use apparently held over from
when I was just creating the app.I thought this had somehow also in some way
regressed to not reproducible. I still think a fairly simple change to the
AppleScript as was originally planned would resolve the issue independently of
parameters. The default DMG build I would think should _always_ indicate
installation to the Applications folder.
With —install-dir this remains a reproducible bug for me at 17-ea.
If a reference build was provided somewhere I might have picked up on the
parameter difference sooner.
