Re: Java 9 support

I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5527 . Apparently the problem is with bnd-tools who seem to be ignoring the problem because Java 9 isn’t final. Since OSGi bundles don’t or won’t have support for multi-release jars they will

Re: Java 9 support

OSGi and Jigsaw have considerable overlap in concepts, so I'm assuming there will be integration efforts eventually. However, a friend went to JavaOne a year or two ago, and the Jigsaw folk were very dismissive of OSGi in general despite one of the leading OSGi spec leads being on the Jigsaw projec

Re: Java 9 support

Nevermind. I moved the dependency plugin after the bundle plugin so that the classes are copied after the bundle plugin runs and all is well. I have no idea how that will impact the OSGi bundle though. Then again, I have no idea if OSGi will support multi-release jars. Ralph > On Mar 15, 2017,

Re: Java 9 support

I have built the Java 9 code. Now I am copying the classes into the log4j-api jar. They have to be placed at META-INF/versions/9. However, when I do this I am getting an error from the Maven bundle plugin. [INFO] --- maven-bundle-plugin:3.2.0:manifest (default) @ log4j-api --- [ERROR] Manifest o

Re: Java 9 support

I don’t see a problem with it. What is released will still run fine on Java 7. It will just have some Java 9 components in the jar. The release is scheduled for late July. I haven’t seen any indication that it will be pushed again. I would rather be ready to take advantage of Java 9 on the day

Re: Java 9 support

It would be bad to require Java 9 to build the main project as long as Java 9 is not released. On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > I can’t change the JDK from JDK 1.7. The rest of the build must be > compiled at Java 7 since that is what we support. I only want to compile > the

Re: Java 9 support

I can’t change the JDK from JDK 1.7. The rest of the build must be compiled at Java 7 since that is what we support. I only want to compile the new classes with Java 9. Using a profile is a very good solution. We would have to run the build twice but that would be OK. I will give that a try.

Re: Java 9 support

Sorry, no idea. A separate repo sounds cleaner, but I haven't spent as much time as you thinking about this, so perhaps I'm wrong. It would be nice to not require Java 9 unless you want to compile the StackWalker stuff... On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > I know how to impl

Re: Java 9 support

You can change the JDK from "JDK 1.7 (latest)" to one of the JDK 9 versions. Since there's no official release of 9 yet, they don't seem to have a "JDK 9 (latest)" profile set up on Jenkins yet. As for building this, the best solution I've seen so far basically involves a bit of manual configurati

Re: Java 9

Sorry, I forgot to reply. The specific thread begins with http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-May/040826.html and the specific message is http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-M

Re: Java 9

Can you point me at some info on that? What massive changes are needed? Remko Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 7, 2017, at 1:36, Apache wrote: > > I fixed the only problem I could find last week. However, we still have more > to do as we really need to support the StackWalker API and the “right”

Re: Java 9

I fixed the only problem I could find last week. However, we still have more to do as we really need to support the StackWalker API and the “right” way to do it would require massive changes. I also need to benchmark the cost of invoking the StackWalker API to return the method’s caller to see w

Re: Java 9

I remember Ralph mentioned that he tested it out and found that it worked pretty well. See issue: On 6 February 2017 at 09:56, Remko Popma wrote: > I haven't had a chance to look at this yet, but is the new stack walking > API in Java 9 of any