On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 20:04:57 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 02:47:04 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 02:47:04 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:07:00 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:26:51 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 14:30:44 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Alexander Matveev has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8351073: [macos] jpackage produces invalid Java runtime DMG bundles [v4]
>
> src/jdk.jpackage/share/classes/jdk
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 15:03:05 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Alexander Matveev has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8351073: [macos] jpackage produces invalid Java runtime DMG bundles [v3]
>
> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jd
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 20:05:51 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 14:20:47 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Alexander Matveev has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8351073: [macos] jpackage produces invalid Java runtime DMG bundles [v4]
>
> test/jdk/tools/jpackage/junit/shar
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 02:01:57 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 02:01:57 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 02:01:57 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 02:01:57 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 02:31:03 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> [19:14:45.620] jdk.jpackage.internal.model.PackagerException:
>> java.lang.ClassCastException: class com.sun.proxy.jdk.proxy1.$Proxy0 cannot
>> be cast to class jdk.jpackage.internal.MacApplicationLayout
>> (com.sun.proxy.jdk.proxy1.$
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 23:25:58 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Alexander Matveev has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8351073: [macos] jpackage produces invalid Java runtime DMG bundles [v3]
>
> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jd
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 23:08:53 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> I need it inside `createMacApplication()` before `MacApplication` instance
>> is created.
>
> If you need a property of a `MacApplication` instance, create it and get the
> property.
> `MacApplicationBuilder.validatedBundleIdentifier()
On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 16:44:05 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 02:15:56 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Maybe run jpackage with `--verbose` flag?
>
> [19:14:45.620] jdk.jpackage.internal.model.PackagerException:
> java.lang.ClassCastException: class com.sun.proxy.jdk.proxy1.$Proxy0 cannot
> be cast to class jdk.jpackage.internal.MacAp
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 02:13:41 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> It does not print call stack. Not sure why. Once I figure it I will update.
>
> Maybe run jpackage with `--verbose` flag?
[19:14:45.620] jdk.jpackage.internal.model.PackagerException:
java.lang.ClassCastException: class com.sun.proxy.j
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 01:45:11 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> What is the full stack trace?
>
> It does not print call stack. Not sure why. Once I figure it I will update.
Maybe run jpackage with `--verbose` flag?
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26173#discuss
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 01:29:44 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Getting following exception at runtime with code above:
>>
>> java.lang.ClassCastException: class com.sun.proxy.jdk.proxy1.$Proxy0 cannot
>> be cast to class jdk.jpackage.internal.MacApplicationLayout
>> (com.sun.proxy.jdk.proxy1.$Pro
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 23:33:36 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Try,
>>
>>
>> builder.task(MacCopyAppImageTaskID.SIGN_RUNTIME_BUNDLE)
>>
>> .appImageAction(MacPackagingPipeline::signApplicationBundle)
>> .add();
>
> Getting following excep
On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 23:16:14 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> One is used by `appImageAction` and second by `packageAction`. Maybe I am
>> misusing appImageAction and packageAction. These two actions requires
>> different argument `AppImageBuildEnv` vs `PackageBuildEnv`.
>
> Try,
>
>
> builder
On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 16:44:05 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 16:44:05 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 01:27:32 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/MacPackagingPipeline.java
>> line 311:
>>
>>> 309: }
>>> 310:
>>> 311: private static void sign(AppImageBuildEnv>> MacApplicationLayout> env) throws IOException {
>>
>> I
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:27:55 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/resources/RuntimeBundle-Info.plist.template
>> line 6:
>>
>>> 4:
>>> 5: CFBundleDevelopmentRegion
>>> 6: English
>>
>> I'm surprised there is no standard way to
On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 00:31:39 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/MacApplicationBuilder.java
>> line 184:
>>
>>> 182: }
>>> 183:
>>> 184: public String validatedBundleIdentifier() throws ConfigException {
>>
>> This method is private on
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 01:30:19 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> runtimeImageDir is a value of --runtime-image in case of runtime installer.
This duplicates `Package.predefinedAppImage()` function. In case of runtime
packaging, the "predefined app image" should be the value of `--runtime-image`.
On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 01:32:38 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
> RUNTIME_PACKAGE_LAYOUT points to "Contents/Home". Bundle is "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS" and "Contents/Info.plist".
Right, so `RUNTIME_PACKAGE_LAYOUT` points to a bundle just like
[ApplicationLayoutUtils.MAC_APPLICATION_LAYOUT]
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 21:44:32 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 00:15:29 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Alexander Matveev has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains two additional
>> c
On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 21:44:32 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>>
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 01:13:20 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Alexander Matveev has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8351073: [macos] jpackage produces invalid Java runtime DMG bundles [v2]
>
> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jdk
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 23:20:08 GMT, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
>> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>>
>> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so
>> it is like new fix.
>>
>> Fi
On Mon, 7 Jul 2025 22:54:32 GMT, Michael Hall wrote:
> What is the .jdk extension preceded by?
{NAME}-{VERSION}.jdk, where {NAME} is value of `--name` and {VERSION} is value
of `--version`.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26173#issuecomment-3046781194
> Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge
> conflict was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
>
> All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
> is like new fix.
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description be
What is the .jdk extension preceded by?
A normal system jdk is like jdk-23.jdk
Maybe something like jpkg-23.jdk to indicate the source of the jre image is
jpakcage? Also ensuring it doesn’t conflict with a normally distributed one.
> On Jul 7, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>
>
Re-submission of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25314 after merge conflict
was resolved. Old PR will be closed.
All comments are addressed from old PR. Merge conflict was significant, so it
is like new fix.
Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
Definiti
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK bundle contains all files as JDK bundle +
> "Contents/_CodeSi
On Wed, 21 May 2025 02:19:31 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Sign
On Wed, 21 May 2025 02:19:31 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Sign
On Wed, 21 May 2025 01:44:48 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> src/jdk.jpackage/windows/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/WinMsiBundler.java
>> line 199:
>>
>>> 197: }
>>> 198: return version;
>>> 199: },
>>
>> I guess, this is a
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK bundle contains all files as JDK bundle +
> "Contents/_CodeSi
On Wed, 21 May 2025 01:39:16 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Test cases are added.
>
> Can you give a reference to a test that expects jpackage to fail with
> `message.runtime-image-invalid` error in the output? I can't find it.
I just push it. See ErrorTest.java.
-
PR Review Comme
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Wed, 21 May 2025 01:24:16 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
>> src/jdk.jpackage/macosx/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/resources/MacResources.properties
>> line 88:
>>
>>> 86: message.codesign.failed.reason.xcode.tools=Possible reason for
>>> "codesign" failure is missing Xcode with command line
On Tue, 20 May 2025 17:05:55 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Signed
On Tue, 20 May 2025 16:57:34 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Signed
On Tue, 20 May 2025 17:00:21 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Signed
On Tue, 20 May 2025 16:39:02 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Signed
On Tue, 20 May 2025 16:35:57 GMT, Alexey Semenyuk wrote:
>> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>>
>> Definitions:
>>
>> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
>> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
>> - Signed
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
On Tue, 20 May 2025 00:47:09 GMT, Alexander Matveev
wrote:
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
>
> - JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
> "Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
> - Signed JDK
> On May 20, 2025, at 4:13 AM, Michael Hall wrote:
>
> The runtime images that you get with make images doesn’t work for
> applications.
I might be misremembering on this. It might be useable as a runtime image to
embed in applications with jpackage?
It is not valid as a system runtime imag
> On May 19, 2025, at 7:53 PM, Alexander Matveev wrote:
>
> Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
>
> Definitions:
Thanks for the follow-up.
To the comments on the issue of would it be useful for jpackage to do this.
The runtime images that you get with m
Fixed jpackage to produce valid Java runtimes based on description below:
Definitions:
- JDK bundle defined as bundle which contains "Contents/Home",
"Contents/MacOS/libjli.dylib" and "Contents/Info.plist".
- Signed JDK bundle contains all files as JDK bundle +
"Contents/_CodeSignature".
- JDK
83 matches
Mail list logo
