HEADS-UP: jfxrt.jar moving to jre/lib/ext

[Kevin Rushforth]

That seems best to me, too. Thanks.

Another reason not to delay is that the recent java launcher changes, 
which were integrated into last week's build, have caused of regression 
in launching JavaFX-packaged applications. So I think there is no good 
alternative to getting this into next week's build.

-- Kevin


Tom Schindl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It depends on how fast you can make this split happen.
>
> The earlier we have javafxrt.jar on the ext-classpath the better. Yes,
> there is likeliness that we break some SWT stuff temporary instead of
> leaving 95% of the JavaFX users in the dust.
>
> This is Java8 and this is not the only thing that breaks with builds ;-)
>
> My take would be:
> a) proceed with moving javafxrt.jar on ext-classpath
> b) work with accelerated speed to fix the swt issue
>    (Equinox user currently won't be hurt)
>
> Tom
>
> Am 24.01.13 20:23, schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
>   
>> Richard Bair wrote:
>>     
>>>>>> 4) Because we still include the javafx.embed.swt package in jfxrt.jar -- see http://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-23041 -- applications that access javafx.embed.swt.FXCanvas will need to put the swt.jar library on the boot classpath in order for it to run.
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Putting swt.jar on the normal class path won't cut it?
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> If get classloaders right no.
>>>>
>>>> Bootclassloader
>>>>  + Extclassloader
>>>>    + ApplicationClassloader
>>>>
>>>> So Extclassloader can only see classes from Bootclassloader for normal
>>>> Java-SWT apps SWT on the bootclassloader will do it, for SWT-OSGi apps
>>>> (which is the majority out there) this will cause extrem troubles
>>>> because they ship swt as an OSGi-Bundle and we'll suddenly have 2
>>>> SWT-Jars on the classpath then:
>>>>
>>>> * FXCanvas will load the one from the bootclasspath
>>>> * Java-Code will load the one from the OSGi-Application-Classpath
>>>>
>>>> => The application will blow up completely, so for SWT-OSGi-Application
>>>> giving the advice to put it on the bootclasspath is a very bad idea.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Does this mean that you can't use the FXCanvas in an OSGI based application?
>>>       
>> If I understand correctly, it means that the short-term workaround of
>> putting swt.jar on the boot classpath won't be a very effective workaround.
>>
>> Perhaps we need to accelerate the separation of the javafx.embed.swt
>> classes from jfxrt.jar (or delay moving jfxrt.jar into lib/ext).
>>
>> -- Kevin
>>
>>     
>
>
>