Why is the windows runtime/sdk only provided as .exe
Kevin Rushforth
kevin.rushforth at oracle.com
Thu May 10 05:40:07 PDT 2012
Hi Kim,
You are right. The FX docs are currently not included with the JDK on
Mac. I have filed RT-21463
<http://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-21463> to address this for FX
2.2 / JDK 7u6.
-- Kevin
Kim Topley wrote:
> As far as I can see, there is no JavaFX API documentation included.
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Kim Topley <kimtopley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> The code goes to
>> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/1.7.0.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/lib - I see
>> jfxrt.jar and the JavaFX DLLs in there. I haven't downloaded the Javadoc
>> package yet - I'll post again when I have done so.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Tom Schindl <tom.schindl at bestsolution.at>wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>
>>> I'm replying here because I think more people who are interested in zips
>>> (e.g. anyone using maven!) are listening here.
>>>
>>> So you are stating in the bug that no zips will be provided anymore
>>> which I think is a very disappointing situation - I will and have to
>>> accept it.
>>>
>>> If you read through the mailing list threads how Richard, Jasper, ...
>>> advised to deploy JavaFX application they always stated that one should
>>> bundle it with the application (probably with the JRE which is a no go
>>> when we talk about Webstart).
>>>
>>> Without providing zips you force me to have:
>>> * Win32
>>> * Mac OS X > 10.7.0
>>> * Linux (in future)
>>>
>>> to extract the fxjar + native libs to repackage in my custom app. I know
>>> I need them anyways to test, ... but forcing me to do it manually
>>> instead of simply providing zip downloads is ridiculous (and because of
>>> the licensing stuff I one person in the world would have done and wants
>>> to share it with the rest of us he/she is not allowed).
>>>
>>> For me as a tooling vendor your current decision gives me headaches
>>> because I want and need to support multiple different SDK-Install-Styles:
>>> * Dev Preview install (done through zips with the structure in there)
>>>
>>> * JDK-7-Installs
>>> => Not sure how they look like and I'm unable to test because I only
>>> have OS-X 10.6.8
>>>
>>> * JDK-6
>>>
>>> When we take a look into the future this JDK-Exe install kind of thing
>>> is a deadend road because you'll stop viewing the JDK/JRE as an all in
>>> one thing installable through one .exe because of jigsaw.
>>>
>>> Anyways I appreciate that you took a look but I'm not happy with it and
>>> hope I can find a way around it until then I can only point people to
>>> the JIRA entry when they want to use e(fx)clipse os OS-X.
>>>
>>> Can anyone here tell me how the OS-X JDK-7-Installation structure looks
>>> like? Where am I supposed to find:
>>> * the javafxrt.jar
>>> * the dlls
>>> * the fx-javadoc
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> Am 08.05.12 15:43, schrieb Tom Schindl:
>>>
>>>> Haveing the SDK-zips will solve all my current problems. Thanks for
>>>>
>>> taking a Look.
>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>>>>
>>>> Am 08.05.2012 um 15:40 schrieb Kevin Rushforth <
>>>>
>>> kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>:
>>>
>>>>> Hi Tom,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just looked and you are right...only see the .exe files were
>>>>>
>>> released for 2.1. I will check into this and get back to you.
>>>
>>>>> The Mac issue will be trickier since we don't have any tested /
>>>>>
>>> supported standalone bundles of JavaFX 2.1 on Mac. As a released product
>>> JavaFX 2.1 for Mac is only available as part of JDK 7u4.
>>>
>>>>> -- Kevin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Schindl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Kevin - can you take a look at this once more? Since the 2.1 release
>>>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>>>> zips for the SDKs are not available anymore!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One can only download the one for 2.2 so it looks like the dev-release
>>>>>> site was adjusted but the GA site not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For those of use doing cross platform development and packaging JavaFX
>>>>>> with their apps getting geting the releases as zips is something
>>>>>>
>>> really
>>>
>>>>>> important.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sidenote: Even worse because I'm still on OS-X 10.6.8 I can't even
>>>>>> install JavaFX because the JDK-7 release requires at least 10.7.0 (I
>>>>>> know you are not support JavaFX prior to JDK 7)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 04.01.12 17:37, schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh, maybe we don't actually release the SDK on the public web page
>>>>>>> either (I knew we didn't release the runtime as a zip since we don't
>>>>>>> even generate it internally).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Kevin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tom Schindl wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Kevin,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well maybe I'm blind but for win32 the there is NO zip available
>>>>>>>>
>>> from
>>>
>>>>>>>> this page [1].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only thing available currently as a zip is the OS-X SDK version
>>>>>>>> which misses the win32 native libs not? I'll file a JIRA.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>>
>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javafx/downloads/devpreview-1429449.html
>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 04.01.12 17:22, schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Good question. The SDK is available as both an installer and a
>>>>>>>>>
>>> zip, and
>>>
>>>>>>>>> we could consider make the runtime available as a zip file as
>>>>>>>>>
>>> well, so
>>>
>>>>>>>>> please file a JIRA feature request for this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As for your other question, it is not currently possible to have
>>>>>>>>>
>>> 2.0.2
>>>
>>>>>>>>> and 2.1 instaled side-by-side.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- Kevin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Tom Schindl wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Now that since 2.0.2 (and also 2.1) are redistributeable it might
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> make
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> sense to provide them also as simple ZIP-Files.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I find it odd that if I want to package JavaFX with my product
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> that I
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> first have to install something only my system, navigate to the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> install
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> dir and copy over the stuff my own project directory.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is it BTW possible to have 2.1 and 2.0.2 installed next to each
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> other? I
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> guess not which makes it hard to test with both versions on the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> same
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> system, which would be made much more easy if provided as simple
>>>>>>>>>> ZIP-Files.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Would you mind providing JavaFX 2.1 binaries (and maybe also >
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> 2.0.2) as
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> a simple zip-File like you do it with 2.1 OS-X ones?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Tom
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> --
>>> B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t EDV Systemhaus GmbH
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> tom schindl geschäftsführer/CEO
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> eduard-bodem-gasse 5-7/1 A-6020 innsbruck fax ++43 512 935833
>>> http://www.BestSolution.at phone ++43 512 935834
>>>
>>>
>>
More information about the openjfx-dev
mailing list