Adding core-iibs-dev… This suggestion sounds useful to me.
I have considered modularizing one particular library, but have chosen not to, in part because of the issue raised here. Alan > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Mark Raynsford <jigsaw-...@io7m.com> > Date: November 11, 2023 at 1:18:21 PM PST > To: jigsaw-...@openjdk.org > > Hello! > > I have multiple applications that are modularized; all of the > application modules are named modules and make heavy use of services. > However, I do have many (transitive) dependencies that are only > automatic modules (using Automatic-Module-Name declarations in the > manifests). > > I want to use jpackage to produce platform-specific application > distributions, but the automatic modules are causing me problems. > Essentially, as far as I can tell, there are exactly two approaches > that jpackage will take: > > 1. Put all of your application jars inside an app directory inside > the app image, and configure the runtime such that all of those > jars end up on the class path. > > 2. Take all of the application modules and compile them into the > resulting app image runtime using jlink. > > It would _really_ help myself (and possibly others, given that I've > never seen a Java application consisting of 100% named modules) if > there was a third option: > > 3. Take all of the application jars and place them inside an app > directory inside the app image, and configure the runtime such > that all of those jars _end up on the module path_. > > Effectively, I'd like a runtime that behaves as if "java -p app" > had been specified on the command-line. I don't care about minimizing > the size of the runtime with jlink by discarding unused modules. I > _do_ care about having a nice double-clickable exe on Windows that > has a nice icon, identifies itself properly in Process Explorer, and > has all of my jars on the module path so that the services work. > > Is anything like this on the horizon? I believe I've published more > JPMS modules than any other individual on the planet, but I've never > been able to make any use of jlink due to the entire world not having > been modularized. I don't want to be rewriting my dependencies with > Moditect and other tools: My dependencies already work correctly on the > module path, I just can't seem to get them into anything jpackage will > produce! > > -- > Mark Raynsford | https://www.io7m.com >
