OpenJFX / JDK 9 questions

Chris Newland cnewland at
Thu Aug 20 07:38:56 UTC 2015

Thanks Kevin, Phil.

I find it encouraging that there is a plan to include jfx as part of the
jdk forest as that will lead to a smoother build process.

Hopefully there will still be a mechanism to add OpenJFX to other JDKs
(Zulu etc.) in a post-Jigsaw world.

I filed a bug just as a reminder: Review ID: JI-9023645 and I'll ask over
on jigsaw-dev about possible future mechanisms for adding to a JDK9



On Wed, August 19, 2015 17:56, Phil Race wrote:
> On 08/18/2015 03:23 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>>> Currently the gradle openZip method makes it easy to create builds
>>> that unpack into OpenJDK / Zulu JDK but this assumes a pre-Jigsaw
>>> (JRE)
>>> structure and doesn't work with JDK9. Shall I submit a bug?
>> We are in the process of making major changes for Jigsaw, so anything
>> we do for the "openZip" task will be a stop-gap until that work is
>> complete. Go ahead and file the bug, though. If nothing else, it will
>> serve as a reminder to test the build with OpenJDK + OpenJFX (without
>> either of the closed bits).
> As a general FYI broader than this use case,  as I understand it, the
> modular JDK image is intended to be opaque. The tools that have learned
> the years the disk layout  - eg that there is jre/lib/rt.jar will need to
> unlearn that. So overlaying on some expected structure is probably not the
> way to do things in JDK 9. I think you will be expected to use tools to
> build a custom image as opposed to installing over someone else's image. I
> am not the authority on this, but if you want to ask any questions about
> use cases, you should ask on jigsaw-dev.
> -phil.

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list