JFX build and deployment - squeaking wheel

[Daniel Zwolenski]

Also very, very interesting.

This format looks quite easy to work with and as far as I can see would
allow for Windows apps to be built on other platforms (e.g. Linux). We
should in theory just be able to include the JRE in the bundle and then
call javaw.exe via the manifest. No native building necessary, just a sort
of "zipping".

I'm still digging but I can't see a way to pass command line params, so
specifying "javaw.exe -jar myapp.jar" via the AppxManifest.xml might be
problematic. Hopefully there is something there for this, but it wouldn't
surprise me if MS didn't support this on purpose.

An alternative might be to have a custom launcher.exe that reads a bundled
app-profile file and then launches java.exe as a new process with the
appropriate details, or a modified JRE that does the same thing but without
starting a new process. Not sure if we'll run into the same legal
restrictions as Mac store though with OpenJDK and GPL (probably) so might
have to limit it to whatever can be done with the Oracle JRE.

Ensemble in the Windows store maybe? I don't have a windows 8 machine yet
though.

Do we know if JFX will need/benefit-from any changes to work on Win8 or
will the current Win implementation be the same used on Win8 going forward?




On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 9:32 AM, John Smith <John_Smith at symantec.com> wrote:

> > Is this what the new Windows Store uses as well?
>
> No, Windows Store does not use MSI, it uses appx files and Open Packaging
> Conventions.
>
> There is no installer, updater or uninstaller for the package, just some
> metadata which a store client can use to install, update or uninstall a
> component.
> appx is just like a zip file with a manifest, similar to a jar file.
>
> Those interested, can see here for info:
>   http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh464929.aspxApp packages and deployment (Windows Store apps)
>   http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh446767.aspxApp packager (MakeAppx.exe) - kind of the Windows Store equivalent of
> javafxpackager.exe
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh446593%28v=vs.85%29.aspxPackaging, deployment, and query of Windows Store apps
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: openjfx-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net [mailto:
> openjfx-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Richard Bair
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 12:58 PM
> To: Josh Marinacci
> Cc: openjfx-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: JFX build and deployment - squeaking wheel
>
> I'm not sure, to be honest.
>
> On Nov 3, 2012, at 11:08 AM, Josh Marinacci <joshua at marinacci.org> wrote:
>
> > Interesting.  Is this what the new Windows Store uses as well?
> >
> > --
> > Josh Marinacci
> > joshondesign.com
> >
> > On Saturday, November 3, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Scott Palmer wrote:
> >
> >> Right. MSI is sort of an official MicroSoft Installer format. The
> >> .msi file is read by the built-in Windows installer APIs. Sort of
> >> like how .pkg is handled natively by OS X, and .rpm and .deb are
> >> handled natively by Linux distros. Exe installers could be anything,
> >> they just aren't the same. though often they are special
> >> bootstrappers tacked on to one or more MSI databases. MSI is a
> >> table-based description of the stuff to install. (It isn't
> >> particularly good mind you, it's just well supported by the Windows
> >> OS.)
> >>
> >> Scott
> >>
> >> On 2012-11-03, at 12:10 PM, Joshua Marinacci <joshua at marinacci.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ah. So an MSI is not just another installer format? It has special
> >>> properties make it different than NSIS?
> >>>
> >>> Most likely sent from Planet Earth
> >>>
> >>> On Nov 3, 2012, at 6:45 AM, Richard Bair <richard.bair at oracle.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> I just tried using the AppBundler (the other one from Java.net) to
> create a Mac bundle with an embedded JRE and it worked pretty well. For
> Windows is an MSI file a requirement or could some other installer system
> work? I just found NSIS which can generate Windows installers from linux.
> >>>>
> >>>> The reason MSI is important is that for many large sites with IT
> departments, they don't want to have to go around from machine to machine
> manually installing software and, they don't trust users to be able to
> download and install software themselves (either by policy or by some means
> of enforcement). Giving the IT department an MSI allows them to remotely
> push updates / software onto the correct users machines according to
> whatever policies they've crafted in their business. Or remove the software
> when the time comes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Richard
> >
>
>