Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

javafx module is part of the Java 7 SDK #83

Open
gavinking opened this issue Nov 27, 2013 · 10 comments
Open

javafx module is part of the Java 7 SDK #83

gavinking opened this issue Nov 27, 2013 · 10 comments

Comments

@gavinking
Copy link
Member

Currently, JDKUtils doesn't find javafx, so I had to import the jar into my repo.

@FroMage
Copy link
Member

FroMage commented Nov 27, 2013

Because it's not part of the JDK, at least not part of its classpath. It will be in Java 8 from what I heard.

@renatoathaydes
Copy link

JavaFX 2.x is "partially" part of the Java 7 SDK. They (Oracle) decided to include the Jar (jfxrt.jar) since java 7_update6 or something, but oddly, not add it to the classpath... therefore everyone has to add it to the classpath manually... But in Ceylon, why shouldn't JavaFX be one of the modules in the Herd?

@FroMage
Copy link
Member

FroMage commented Nov 27, 2013

I guess we could add it to Herd if it doesn't use any native library.

@renatoathaydes
Copy link

I've made JavaFX work in an OSGi container by adding all the packages it requires to work to the OSGi extra system packages.. I got that information by using BdlUtils.wrap and you can find the result in this Gist:

https://gist.github.com/renatoathaydes/5021107

I hope this information helps.... but I believe the JavaFX jar itself is platform-independent (you don't need to download a specific Jar for each OS!) and therefore this shouldn't be an issue....

Also, I added the JavaFX jar to my ceylon private repo and it worked just fine (even though it would be much better if it would be possible to add some metadata to hide sun classes (app developers should be able to see javafx.application.Application, but not com.sun.glass.ui.Application for example).

@FroMage
Copy link
Member

FroMage commented Nov 27, 2013

That doesn't mean it doesn't require native libs provided by the JDK. If you manage to make the jfx jar work in a JDK7 < java 7_update6 (or wherever it got added), then it is a better proof.

@gavinking
Copy link
Member Author

Well look there is an alternative solution to the problem which is to simply add the jar to Herd. I assume that is OK from a license standpoint but how can we verify that?

Sent from my iPhone

On 27 Nov 2013, at 11:49 am, Stéphane Épardaud notifications@github.com wrote:

That doesn't mean it doesn't require native libs provided by the JDK. If you manage to make the jfx jar work in a JDK7 < java 7_update6 (or wherever it got added), then it is a better proof.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@FroMage
Copy link
Member

FroMage commented Nov 27, 2013

We can't add it to Herd if it requires native libs to run, otherwise it will not run for everyone. That's what I'm trying to figure out.

@gavinking
Copy link
Member Author

We can't add it to Herd if it requires native libs to run, otherwise it will not run for everyone.

It will run for everyone who has a sufficiently uptodate Java 7 VM. So I don't see this as a real problem.

@ncorai
Copy link

ncorai commented Nov 27, 2013

My 2¢: It would make sense that users of Java 7 pre u6 be early adopters, and thus be likely to have moved on to a more recent release. Also, security flaws.

@FroMage
Copy link
Member

FroMage commented Sep 25, 2014

Moving again, unfortunately.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants