OK. I didn’t follow exactly what you’re doing. So I don’t know what would be extra. I also assume it wouldn’t address any other architecture specific parts of the jdk that you mentioned.
How are you planning on replacing the executables and getting valid signed applications? I think it could be managed if you jpackage an application only image. Then replace the executables. Then sign and dmg. > On Mar 7, 2024, at 3:39 PM, Alan Snyder <javali...@cbfiddle.com> wrote: > > That could be done, but it would require more work with no obvious benefit. > > Only the Java launcher needs to be universal from the perspective of the OS. > > > > >> On Mar 7, 2024, at 1:24 PM, Michael Hall <mik3h...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Not directly in response to your prior. But curious, are you doing something >> like described here? >> >> https://developer.apple.com/documentation/apple-silicon/building-a-universal-macos-binary >> >> If not why not? >> >> It indicates >> >>> For universal binaries, the system prefers to execute the slice that is >>> native to the current platform. >> >> Isn’t that saying the OS will just do the right thing? >
