> Please review these changes to jpackage in light of [JEP > 493](https://openjdk.org/jeps/493). When this feature is enabled, then some > of the `jpackage` tests fail. The failures fall into the following categories: > > - `ALL-DEFAULT` notion from `jpackage` which includes all modules that export > an API, which includes `jdk.jlink`, which is prevented from being included > when linking from the run-time image (see the [JEP > 493](https://openjdk.org/jeps/493) restrictions). The proposal is to change > module resolution from `Configuration.resolveAndBind()` to > `Configuration.resolve()`. I.e. don't perform service binding which is in > line what [JEP 392](https://openjdk.org/jeps/392) and [JEP > 343](https://openjdk.org/jeps/343) claim. That is, this patch brings the > implementation aligned to what it says on the JEPs > - `ALL-MODULE-PATH` changes: `BasicTest.java` verifies the `--add-modules` > argument to `jpackage`. Using `ALL-MODULE-PATH` for JDK modules won't be > supported for JEP 493-enabled builds. So I've changed this test to skip the > test using `ALL-MODULE-PATH` when we have such an enabled build. Other tests, > such as `RuntimeImageTest.java` and `RuntimeImageSymbolicLinksTest.java` > tests verify something else not related to `ALL-MODULE-PATH` or > `--add-modules`. It seems more appropriate to use the smaller set of modules > to use for the runtime JDK image. > - `JLinkOptionsTest.java`: That test verifies options passed to `jlink` via > the `ToolProvider` API. For some reason, it uses `--bind-services` > extensively and that - in turn - and, when not limited with the > `--limit-modules` option as well, will include `jdk.jlink` in the resulting > image, again running afoul the JEP 493 restriction of not allowing > `jdk.jlink` for now. I propose to use suitable options including > `--limit-modules` which would then no longer include `jdk.jlink` in the > runtime image and the link from a run-time image works as well. These changes > depend on [JDK-8345573](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345573) for it > to work fully. > > Testing: > - [x] GHA > - [x] running tests in `test/jdk/tools/jpackage` on a JEP 493 enabled JDK. As > far as I could see the failures that I was seeing weren't any more related to > JEP 493 (some RPM requirements showing up that it didn't expect to). > > Thoughts? Opinions?
Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Use TKit.trace() ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22644/files - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22644/files/1f4c6701..d6f7f06d Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22644&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22644&range=01-02 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22644.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22644/head:pull/22644 PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22644
