IcedTea-Web 1.8?

[Jiri Vanek]

On 10/1/18 1:50 PM, Richard Stollar wrote:
>          <installer-desc main-class="com.wibble.Installer"/>


If you are bale to self build ITW, you can patch it, that it handles installer-desc in same way as 
application-desc but thats just funny experiment where to start.

>      If I remove the extension from /main.jnlp/ then the application runs up to a point but we 
> receive application errors due to the missing certificate (specifically javax.net.ssl.SSLException: 
> java.lang.NullPointerException: Code source security was null).
> 
>      As an experiment I tried to run the installer.jar and this is where I saw the error message:
> 
>     Fatal: Unsupported Feature: Installers are not supported. JNLP installer files are not yet
>     supported.
> 
>      Any assistance will be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Richard Stollar <http://www.stollar.co.uk>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 01/10/18 12:03, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> adding distro-pkg-dev meioing list as main discussions about ITW happens here.
>>
>> On 9/28/18 11:48 AM, Richard Stollar wrote:
>>> Hello Jiri,
>>>
>>>      I am involved in a project that has until now relied upon WebStart which as you will know 
>>> has been removed in Java 11. To solve our problems we are testing with IcedTea-Web as it looks 
>>> quite promising.
>>
>> Should be. We had tried hard.
>>>
>>>      Our problem lies in the fact that we use an extension JNLP embedded in our main JNLP(s) and 
>>> that is not currently supported in ITW-1.7. Is there a roadmap for 1.8 which, according to the 
>>> WIKI page, should include shared launchers.  Is this functionality in a development release?
>>
>>
>> I doubt. 1.8 should bring new native launchers, to avoid duplicated codebase for MS and Linux. 
>> Also to fix many persiting issues we have with shell (well, mostly bat) lunchers.
>>
>> Unless what you descibe, works on linux, but not on Win, than it is not on roadmap. Still I have 
>> nothing against implementing it for both 1.8. and 1.7 (unless it have some side effects).
>>
>> Do you mind to elaborate more what you need? If you can add support, even better. If somebody else 
>> should, can you prepare minimalistic reproducer?
>>
>> However.. I think extensions are in some ways already supported. So maybe issue si somewhere else?
>>
>> HTH
>>  J.
> 


-- 
Jiri Vanek
Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
Red Hat Czech
jvanek at redhat.com    M: +420775390109