It's totally fine to use that under the provision it's up to date (or you know what you're doing). This is readily available in a different project, which is less known with Adopt mostly suggesting adopting its own binaries. We're slowly getting there without the constraints the others have. Then it's nigh to impossible to fullfil the JCP requirements in the context of an OSS Linux distribution. On top of that, the release policy of the Linux distributions does not play well with the OpenJDK schedule (you can have AdoptOpenJDK 15 that runs on Ubuntu Xenial). Doing Debian packages right is difficult and if the package maintainers cannot figure it out themselves, it's unlikely that we can. If there are perceived problems with the Debian packages, has it been considered to contribute directly to make those better? What would be lost if Adopt would stop providing Windows binaries and point users to the ojdkbuild project instead? At least that would gain them OpenJFX support. As you see above there are requests to provide OpenJFX for Windows. My point is that I see no benefit in introducing OpenJFX to AdoptOpenJDK as I am not aware of the benefits of the Adopt binaries. And if somebody would volunteer, we're happy to offer the necessary assistance I only wanted to note that we're not against offering OpenJFX 8 but haven't done so in the past because we didn't found anybody who could maintain it. If you're happy with what you have, that's great, especially if you like building OpenJDK yourself. I never ran into issues doing yum/ apt/ pacman/etc. The packages of Debian and its flavours have had problems historically, especially around the JPMS and jpackage. That's good to know :) Maybe you could also tag along the one behind the work? We have a dozen (or so) Red Hat engineers wink None of the other builds could satisfy that at the time. Which problems did you run into with the builds from the ojdkbuild project? The reason I based my OpenJFX 8 repository on ojdkbuild is because I needed up to date non-Windows builds and I wanted to have insight in all the patches that were included. I'm stuck with Java 8 for our application. I created some PRs a while back but they are essentially ignoring them. Their version also misses WebKit support. I do not know if they already managed to put this in we switched over to Amazon Coretto Īs mentioned the version of OpenJFX 8 included with Corretto is old and has known vulnerabilities. I have had a positive call with BellSoft regarding the patches they use for LibericaFX 8 and whether they can provide insight into those. Jfxwebkit.dll from other distributions seems to now fix this but now I'm unsure what is missing as it is a slightly smaller size that what one I think you had better use Liberica JDK or ZuluFX.ĭo you know which patches ZuluFX includes? Last time I checked they did not publish their sources along the binaries and one had to request them for a transfer fee. : .twkUpdateRendering(J)VĪt .twkUpdateRendering(Native Method)Īt .updateRendering(WebPage.java:648)Īt .updateContent(WebPage.java:641)Īt .(NGWebView.java:74)Īt .handleStagePulse(WebView.java:999)Īt .lambda$new$0(WebView.java:280)Īt .Toolkit.lambda$runPulse$2(Toolkit.java:399)Īt (Native Method)Īt .nPulse(Toolkit.java:398)Īt .Toolkit.firePulse(Toolkit.java:422)Īt .(QuantumToolkit.java:518)Īt .(QuantumToolkit.java:498)Īt .(QuantumToolkit.java:491)Īt .$runToolkit$11(QuantumToolkit.java:319)Īt .InvokeLaterDispatcher$n(InvokeLaterDispatcher.java:95)Īt .win.WinApplication._runLoop(Native Method)Īt .$null$3(WinApplication.java:177)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |