OK, but with -providerClass I'd like to support a class name even if it
is already defined in a module as a service and has its own name. This
makes sure old commands still work.
The existing -providerClass takes a class name and works as before. The
-provider takes the name of a security provider and locates the provider
with that name. For -provider then an example in the usage message
would make it very clear.
Will file a sub-task.
You are right that it would be simple code to fallback and handle both
but this will just lead to mis-use and will make it harder to change in
the future. For the java.security file then the fallback was important
because it seemed common for 3rd party providers to add security
providers there. It's not obvious that it is important here.
BTW: Docs and help output use the term "provider master class". Is the
word "master" needed? It hints of master key or the like but it's really
the name of the security provider implementation class.
I think by "master" it means the class implementing Provider but not the
one implementing KeyStore or KeyPairGenerator. It's not needed.
Thanks
Max
-Alan
