Yes, Pac200 is already removed from jdk lib... So what is the solution? We have to face this someday eventually, so why not today?
I can only get ideas of 2 ways... 1. we remove Pac200 as well, as jdk do. 2. we fork the Pac200 from jdk and create a new lib for it, and we invoke that lib instead of jdk's Pac200. 3. we clean room a implementation of Pac200 (seems not quite worthy) So which will we pick? Or, any better ideas? Peter Lee <peter...@apache.org> 于2020年8月21日周五 下午3:24写道： > > > Compress master now requires Java 8, so we can drop Java 7 from Jenkins, > > please do go ahead. > > > > Done. > > > For Java 14 and up, failures are due to the removal of Pack200 support > from > > the JDK. > > > > Yes, we all know this. Before we managed to figure out the solution, I'm > just thinking if we should make the builds' status green on JDK14+ by > setting some "allow failure" config in GH actions and jenkins. > cheers, > Lee > > On 8 20 2020, at 8:06 , Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 7:57 AM Peter Lee <peter...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > The builds in jenkins and github actions are failing. > > > For jenkins, the java7, 14 and 16 builds are failing. As we have moved > > > from JAVA 7 to 8, maybe we should disable java 7 build in jenkins? > Besides > > > the java 14 and 16 are also failing, and we can have some "allow > failure" > > > config on them. > > > For github actions, the java 14 and 15 builds are failing. We can > easily > > > make java 14 build a part of experimental build to have it > > > continue-on-error. > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > Compress master now requires Java 8, so we can drop Java 7 from Jenkins, > > please do go ahead. GitHub and Travis do not build on Java 7, their > lowest > > Java version is 8. > > > > For Java 14 and up, failures are due to the removal of Pack200 support > from > > the JDK. I think we are still trying to figure out how to remedy this > > within Compress, maybe by bringing in Apache Harmony code. For a Compress > > 2.0, we could talk about dropping Pack200 altogether along with any BC > > breaking changes we might want to do. > > > > Gary > > cheers, > > > Lee > > > > > > >
