Hi Peter, On 21/04/16 12:09, Peter Levart wrote: > The situation is not so complicated, I think. . . .
Thank you very much for your example code. I understand that it will be possible to localize the changes into a small part of the agent codebase. My problem was not with this factoring of the code but rather with the build and deployment process. I was assuming that I would have to locate any jdk9-specific code in a separate extension jar and ensure that clients consistently hoist both the jdk9-specific extension jar and the vanilla agent jar into either the system classpath or the bootstrap classpath when running on JDK9(+). The alternative was to use the new multi-release jar model to deploy the agent jar but, of course, I don't suppose that is ever going to work for JDK6 deployments. As you say, I can avoid this dilemma simply by bundling all the code into the one agent jar and instantiating the relevant management classes indirectly according to whether modules are present or not. That will ensure that the JDK9(+)-compiled classes are not loaded when running on JDK8(-). Thanks once again for your, as ever, very helpful insights. regards, Andrew Dinn -----------
