On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 15:37:29 GMT, Severin Gehwolf <sgehw...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > A few very minor things that I jotted down while looking at the current > > proposal: > > ``` > > * Adding a resource to serve as a marker that indicates it was created > > without the packaged modules is fine. I think the name should be looked as > > "runimage" is a bit consistent for this area. I'm also wondering if it > > would be better to hide in jdk/internal somewhere to avoid any tooling > > assuming it's a supported interface. > > ``` > > How does `jdk/internal/runimage` as a name sound? Coming back to this. Since `jlink` [verifies the packages in the module descriptor are equal](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/a75b6e569fe5f8e98326940f541423ac39b204a3/src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/ResourcePoolConfiguration.java#L90-L95) to the observed packages, we cannot add packages that way without also changing the module descriptor. I've renamed the resource file to `jdk_internal_runimage` for now. Hope that's sufficient. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14787#issuecomment-1810581824
