OS X commandline tools
I think I may of raised this as an issue sometime earlier. I filed a bug report through bug report.java We will review your report and have assigned it an internal review ID : 9051382 . But as I recall earlier it was indicated that this involved files owned by Apple. For one thing I think they seem to symbolic link files in an apple legacy java Framework. The solution as I remember it was for Mike Swingler to update the files. This doesn’t seem like something you would want him to continue doing on an ongoing basis. For now I looked at it again because there seems to be nothing at all pointing to the jlink command for me. echo `which jdeps` is here /usr/bin/jdeps is here echo `which jlink` is here is here Nothing ‘is here’ What didn’t seem appropriate to the bug report is /usr/libexec/java_home. This has been a useful platform specific command line tool for some time. Currently it is somewhat broken. This works… /usr/libexec/java_home /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk-9.jdk/Contents/Home This didn’t seem to work but now does seem to but with a incorrect(?) error message. /usr/libexec/java_home -v 1.9 --exec java -version Unable to find any JVMs matching version "1.9". java version "9" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 9+181) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 9+181, mixed mode) Is this supported? Did Apple contribute this to the port? Would anyone be making changes to it or is it possible to get the source to change on your own?
Re: OS X commandline tools
Use “9” instead of “1.9” > On Oct 28, 2017, at 7:12 AM, Michael Hall wrote: > > I think I may of raised this as an issue sometime earlier. > > I filed a bug report through bug report.java > We will review your report and have assigned it an internal review ID : > 9051382 . > > But as I recall earlier it was indicated that this involved files owned by > Apple. For one thing I think they seem to symbolic link files in an apple > legacy java Framework. > The solution as I remember it was for Mike Swingler to update the files. This > doesn’t seem like something you would want him to continue doing on an > ongoing basis. > > For now I looked at it again because there seems to be nothing at all > pointing to the jlink command for me. > > echo `which jdeps` is here > /usr/bin/jdeps is here > > echo `which jlink` is here > is here > > Nothing ‘is here’ > > What didn’t seem appropriate to the bug report is /usr/libexec/java_home. > This has been a useful platform specific command line tool for some time. > Currently it is somewhat broken. > This works… > /usr/libexec/java_home > /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk-9.jdk/Contents/Home > > This didn’t seem to work but now does seem to but with a incorrect(?) error > message. > /usr/libexec/java_home -v 1.9 --exec java -version > Unable to find any JVMs matching version "1.9". > java version "9" > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 9+181) > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 9+181, mixed mode) > > Is this supported? Did Apple contribute this to the port? Would anyone be > making changes to it or is it possible to get the source to change on your > own? > >
Re: OS X commandline tools
> >> >> What didn’t seem appropriate to the bug report is /usr/libexec/java_home. >> This has been a useful platform specific command line tool for some time. >> Currently it is somewhat broken. >> This works… >> /usr/libexec/java_home >> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk-9.jdk/Contents/Home >> >> This didn’t seem to work but now does seem to but with a incorrect(?) error >> message. >> /usr/libexec/java_home -v 1.9 --exec java -version >> Unable to find any JVMs matching version "1.9". >> java version "9" >> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 9+181) >> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 9+181, mixed mode) >> >> Is this supported? Did Apple contribute this to the port? Would anyone be >> making changes to it or is it possible to get the source to change on your >> own? >> >> > > On Oct 28, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Alan Snyder wrote: > > Use “9” instead of “1.9” Eliminates the error message. I should of looked at what version was actually giving me. Curious on the rest but this was the only real current issue. Thanks.
Re: OS X commandline tools
On 28/10/2017 15:12, Michael Hall wrote: I think I may of raised this as an issue sometime earlier. I filed a bug report through bug report.java We will review your report and have assigned it an internal review ID : 9051382 . But as I recall earlier it was indicated that this involved files owned by Apple. I think so, meaning it's the macOS installation and updates that add the sym links to /usr/bin. I don't think it's something that we can help with here, or even in OpenJDK. Once you set your PATH to the installation directory then you should be able to use jlink. -Alan
Re: OS X commandline tools
> On Oct 28, 2017, at 1:59 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > On 28/10/2017 15:12, Michael Hall wrote: >> I think I may of raised this as an issue sometime earlier. >> >> I filed a bug report through bug report.java >> We will review your report and have assigned it an internal review ID : >> 9051382 . >> >> But as I recall earlier it was indicated that this involved files owned by >> Apple. > I think so, meaning it's the macOS installation and updates that add the sym > links to /usr/bin. I don't think it's something that we can help with here, > or even in OpenJDK. Once you set your PATH to the installation directory then > you should be able to use jlink. > > -Alan So this means that without setting PATH the java command line tools are not available on OS X? Or just new ones? Is there potential conflict for existing commands pointed to out of /usr/bin? Or will that be assumed to work correctly as-is indefinitely?
Re: OS X commandline tools
> On Oct 28, 2017, at 2:03 PM, Michael Hall wrote: > >> On Oct 28, 2017, at 1:59 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: >> >> On 28/10/2017 15:12, Michael Hall wrote: >>> I think I may of raised this as an issue sometime earlier. >>> >>> I filed a bug report through bug report.java >>> We will review your report and have assigned it an internal review ID : >>> 9051382 . >>> >>> But as I recall earlier it was indicated that this involved files owned by >>> Apple. >> I think so, meaning it's the macOS installation and updates that add the sym >> links to /usr/bin. I don't think it's something that we can help with here, >> or even in OpenJDK. Once you set your PATH to the installation directory >> then you should be able to use jlink. >> >> -Alan > > So this means that without setting PATH the java command line tools are not > available on OS X? Or just new ones? Is there potential conflict for existing > commands pointed to out of /usr/bin? Or will that be assumed to work > correctly as-is indefinitely? Not that I can’t set PATH. That works for me. I am just wondering about other Mac users who start running into this. I guess if they don’t have the legacy commands around nothing will be there and they will have to discover setting PATH?
