RFR [8039152] Need a way to suppress message when picking up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS

[Seán Coffey]

On 03/04/2014 21:04, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>
> On 03.04.2014 22:27, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>> With “Unified JVM Logging” (JEP-158) we plan to make sure that all 
>> warnings/error and other output from the JVM can be redirected to 
>> files or muted. I think that is the real solution we are looking for 
>> here. That feature is currently planned for JDK 9.
>
> What we were asked for is a solution for jdk7u.
> I don't think Unified JVM Logging is going to be ported back to jdk7 
> once it is implemented.
Agreed. Do we have a choice of just fixing this in 7u and 8u ? Probably 
safer to cover all codelines.

regards,
Sean.
>
> Sincerely yours,
> Ivan
>
>> /Staffan
>>
>> On 3 apr 2014, at 19:16, Seán Coffey <sean.coffey at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 03/04/2014 17:03, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>>>>> Ivan,
>>>>>
>>>>> The VM squawks about JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS and _JAVA_OPTIONS being used
>>>>> because they are dangerous. Adding an option that would allow the
>>>>> same mechanism to be used without warning would be... well...
>>>>> even more dangerous.
>>>>>
>>>> The customer already has a way to get rid of the warning: 
>>>> Preprocess the output and filter the warning out.
>>>> This approach is ugly, hard to make general and leads to errors.
>>>>
>>>> I think we should provide an option to achieve the same effect but 
>>>> without that hard work around.
>>> I think this suggested enhancement would be a plus to many 
>>> enterprises. The issue stems from the submitter running into issues 
>>> with how the user.home property works on windows vista and later. 
>>> Fix was addressed in JDK-6519127 and JDK8 but can't be backported to 
>>> 7u due to behavioural differences. Given the enterprise and many 
>>> applications, a per application system property to set the user.home 
>>> property wasn't suitable. _JAVA_OPTIONS makes for easier deployment 
>>> of this property.
>>>
>>> Now - with submitter having to use _JAVA_OPTIONS, it spews out such 
>>> settings to stderr. Other applications are scraping output from 
>>> stderr. Yes - not a great design, but that's the way it is.
>>>
>>> This new option would surely be a useful addition for anyone running 
>>> into such an issue. Is there a better way without them re-writing 
>>> application code ?
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Sean.
>>>> Sincerely yours,
>>>> Ivan
>>
>>
>