New jre layout broke Maven and Ant

[Eric Richardson]

Hi,

Some time back, Michael Franz and I experimented with compiling
Icetea/bsd-port/zero on Mac OSX PowerPC. We ran into the fact that the
Icetea harness expected a standard JDK/JRE layout on the file system.
We managed to create a script to symlink and copy some things about
and Michael managed to make it so the Mac OSX Java 5 could bootstrap
the system.

Anyway, to make this short, I think it is a good idea if the layout is
the same across OS platforms if possible - it really reduces
relearning when moving from one OS to the other.

Just my 2 cents,
Eric

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Henri Gomez <henri.gomez at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes. the assumption is that you can always walk up one directory and find the JDK, but that's no longer true, because the 1.7.0.jre bundle has to be an atomic Mac OS X bundle that can be placed inside of another app bundle. Ideally, and IDE which contains a 1.7.0.jdk bundle will contain all it needs inside of itself to generate .jre based app bundles, or whole new copy of itself with a .jdk bundle.
>>
>> My usual trick would be to make a "jdk" symlink to ../../../ inside of 1.7.0.jre/Contents/Home, and have the tools just look for a "jdk" directory, but my experience with adding backwards pointing symlinks has not been popular with some folks that are dependent on zip-based archiving. So, is there a better alternative?
>
> I understand and commented JIRA.
>
> First proposal :
>
> Packaging it differently
>
> * OpenJDK 7 OSX atomic bundle (specific package, ie a plain zip/tarball)
> * OpenJDK 7 OSX JDK runtime (same layout Windows or Linux)
>
> Packagers/Bundlers will more than likely prefer to use .zip/tarball
> file, not something mounted from DMG/PKG (I got one issue one
> openjdk-osx-build).
>
> So OpenJDK 7 OSX will contains a standard OpenJDK layout + a
> zip/tarballcontaining atomic Mac OS X bundle ready to use for
> packagers.
>
> Second proposal :
>
> Why not just copying 1.7.0.jre content into jre for now ?
>