[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-core-libs-dev
Subject:    Re: RFR: 8311302: Allow for jlinking a custom runtime without packaged modules being present [v6]
From:       Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf () openjdk ! org>
Date:       2023-11-14 16:16:36
Message-ID: Bvn-Yg25I7fDqwMyVFJyu8DqD1E5zei31FJrOkcpUyg=.e6e562f9-379c-4813-aaab-406a47c4ff4d () github ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 15:37:29 GMT, Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf@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/a75b6e569fe5f8e98326940f541423ac39b204a \
3/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


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]