Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 4:07 PM, Andy Herrick wrote: > > > > > then in app you can find any of the tools by using > System.getProperty("java.home") and looking in "bin" subdir. > > So in the app you can refer to any of the tools by their full path. > Not to keep dragging this on. But I di

Re: jpackage current status

> > now you can build runtime that has the tools like I do here: > >> $JDK_HOME/bin/jlink --bind-services --output mods.runtime --add-modules >> me.mymodule --module-path '../input-mods/mods' > (../input-mods/mods has my app in me.mymodule) > > then in app you can find any of the tools by usi

Re: jpackage current status

On 2/24/2020 4:32 PM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 24, 2020, at 2:59 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: On 2/24/2020 12:31 PM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:15 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: Since your ToolProvider-based program doesn

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 2:59 PM, Kevin Rushforth > wrote: > > > > On 2/24/2020 12:31 PM, Michael Hall wrote: >> >>> On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael Hall wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:15 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: Since your ToolProvider-based progra

Re: jpackage current status

versions. Gruss Bernd -- http://bernd.eckenfels.net Von: core-libs-dev im Auftrag von Michael Hall Gesendet: Montag, Februar 24, 2020 9:33 PM An: Kevin Rushforth Cc: core-libs-dev Betreff: Re: jpackage current status > On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael H

Re: jpackage current status

On 2/24/2020 12:31 PM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:15 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: Since your ToolProvider-based program doesn't explicitly require jdk.incubator.jpackage, it won't be in the module graph. It should work fin

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:48 PM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > >> On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:15 PM, Kevin Rushforth >> wrote: >> >> Since your ToolProvider-based program doesn't explicitly require >> jdk.incubator.jpackage, it won't be in the module graph. It should work fine >> if you run with: >

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 1:15 PM, Kevin Rushforth > wrote: > > Since your ToolProvider-based program doesn't explicitly require > jdk.incubator.jpackage, it won't be in the module graph. It should work fine > if you run with: > > $ java --add-modules jdk.incubator.jpackage ... > I’m not und

Re: jpackage current status

Since your ToolProvider-based program doesn't explicitly require jdk.incubator.jpackage, it won't be in the module graph. It should work fine if you run with: $ java --add-modules jdk.incubator.jpackage ... -- Kevin On 2/24/2020 8:23 AM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 22, 2020, at 7:02 PM, Mi

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 11:16 AM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > >> On Feb 24, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Andy Herrick > > wrote: >> >> We have no problem invoking jpackage through the tool provider interface in >> all of our test cases. >> >> In previous emails you descr

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 24, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Andy Herrick wrote: > > We have no problem invoking jpackage through the tool provider interface in > all of our test cases. > > In previous emails you described using a hybrid jdk13/jdk14 jdk. Can you > explain what exactly you are using ? > > /Andy I was

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 22, 2020, at 12:04 PM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > >> On Feb 22, 2020, at 11:10 AM, Michael Hall > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Feb 22, 2020, at 10:14 AM, Tom Schindl >> > wrote: >>> >>> At Eclipse it is tracked as >>> ht

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 22, 2020, at 11:10 AM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > >> On Feb 22, 2020, at 10:14 AM, Tom Schindl > > wrote: >> >> At Eclipse it is tracked as >> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559482 >>

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 22, 2020, at 10:14 AM, Tom Schindl wrote: > > At Eclipse it is tracked as > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559482 > Thanks. Not quite sure what would of triggered it yesterday.

Re: jpackage current status

At Eclipse it is tracked as https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=559482 Tom Von meinem iPhone gesendet > Am 22.02.2020 um 16:39 schrieb Kevin Rushforth : > > The Failure to GetJREPath is due to JDK-8238225 [1]. Eclipse was > specifically mentioned as being affected by this. It is alr

Re: jpackage current status

The Failure to GetJREPath is due to JDK-8238225 [1]. Eclipse was specifically mentioned as being affected by this. It is already fixed in JDK 15. -- Kevin https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238225 On 2/22/2020 7:32 AM, Michael Hall wrote: On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:18 AM, Michael Hall

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:18 AM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > >> On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Kevin Rushforth >> wrote: >> >> I doubt this has anything to do with jpackage being in incubator or not. >> Fundamentally, just copying binary launchers into another JDK image like you >> are doin

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 11:12 AM, Kevin Rushforth > wrote: > > I doubt this has anything to do with jpackage being in incubator or not. > Fundamentally, just copying binary launchers into another JDK image like you > are doing is only going to work by accident, if it works at all. If you need

Re: jpackage current status

I doubt this has anything to do with jpackage being in incubator or not. Fundamentally, just copying binary launchers into another JDK image like you are doing is only going to work by accident, if it works at all. If you need jpackage (or javac or jar or ...) to be in a JDK image, then you sho

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Michael Hall wrote: > >> You can't copy launchers in this way as it requires the module to be in the >> run-time image. > > If I add modules it into the build runtime I think I’m ok but haven’t tried > it yet. jpackage seems to need more than just the module

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 9:41 AM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > >> On Feb 21, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Philip Race wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I don't understand what you are doing here. >> It is like you are copying around an application >> which has dependent libraries but not copying those libraries. >>

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 9:39 AM, Philip Race wrote: > > Hi, > > I don't understand what you are doing here. > It is like you are copying around an application > which has dependent libraries but not copying those libraries. > > Copying bits out of the JDK to some other location isn't something

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 9:36 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > > > On 21/02/2020 15:23, Michael Hall wrote: >> If I look at the jpackage page… >> >> The jpackage tool has been integrated into the JDK, and is now included in >> JDK 14 early access builds. >> >> The normal early access page now ind

Re: jpackage current status

Hi, I don't understand what you are doing here. It is like you are copying around an application which has dependent libraries but not copying those libraries. Copying bits out of the JDK to some other location isn't something you can expect to work. And why does your application need jpackag

Re: jpackage current status

On 21/02/2020 15:23, Michael Hall wrote: If I look at the jpackage page… The jpackage tool has been integrated into the JDK, and is now included in JDK 14 early access builds. The normal early access page now indicates release candidate and the download no longer includes -ea However, the

Re: jpackage current status

> On Feb 21, 2020, at 9:27 AM, Scott Palmer wrote: > > It's included as a preview feature, so it's still incubating. > OK, I’ll include the module. Remove it later. Thanks

Re: jpackage current status

It's included as a preview feature, so it's still incubating. On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:24 AM Michael Hall wrote: > If I look at the jpackage page… > > The jpackage tool has been integrated into the JDK, and is now included in > JDK 14 early access builds. > > The normal early access page now i