Please review fix for 6951599 (Rename package of security tools for modularization)

Mandy Chung mandy.chung at
Thu May 13 23:40:35 PDT 2010

Hi Max,

Wang Weijun wrote:
> Hi Mandy
> Sorry for late comment. My email client on Nokia E71 keeps crashing. 
> (Hope it's good this time).

It's good.  Thanks for the comment.

> I'm quite sure there are people out there calling KeyTool the same 
> way. Also, I feel a little weird that one tool is treated diffrently 
> from others.
> Is it possible to leave all current class unchanged, and create new 
> packages called (xxx can be keytool, jarsigner, 
> policytool), each with a single Xxx class whose main() simply calls 

The main reason for this fix is to separate the dependency of each tool.

jdk.policytool -> jdk.desktop
jdk.keytool -> jdk.jsse
jdk.jarsigner -> jdk.keytool

If there are classes in the package that references 
policytool, keytool, and jarsigner modules, it's no different than the 
current implementation.   There are two alternatives to leave all 
classes in the same package as it is but they are undesirable:
1) create 3 additional implementation modules (e.g. sun.policytool, 
sun.keytool, and sun.jarsigner) that are locally connected so that the 
classes are loaded by the same loader (that's the solution to resolve 
the split package issue).

2) create 1 module containing all* classes to be 
required by jdk.policytool, jdk.keytool, and jdk.jarsigner - meaning 
that these tools would depend on the desktop (i.e. client) module while 
keytool and jarsigner are cli tools.

Is there a CCC tracking the KeyTool as an external interface?  How about 
PolicyTool?   Another option is only move PolicyTool to a new package 
and leave all in keytool module.  The jarsigner will 
be an empty module with an entry point to JarSigner class that resides 
in the keytool module.

> Also, there are 3 Windows-only security tools (kinit, klist, ktab) in 
> Should they be isolated the same way?

Thanks for pointing that out.   All classes are 
currently in the kerberos module which is required by these windows 
security tools.  I think the krb5 implementation is well isolated (in 
the** package).

> Thanks
> Max
> ------- Original message -------
>> From: Mandy Chung <mandy.chung at>
>> To: security-dev at
>> Sent: 14.5.'10,  13:16
>> I revised the fix to rename the package of keytool instead of 
>> jarsigner. Apparently, there are customers who depend on the 
>> jarsigner class.
>> Webrev at:
>> I also updated the copyright year (thanks Brad for pointing that out).
>> Thanks
>> Mandy
>> Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Please review the fix for:
>>>   6951599: Rename package of security tools for modularization
>>> Webrev:
>>> Move KeyTool, PolicyTool and JarSigner classes to its own package so 
>>> that the classes can be placed in its own module while eliminating 
>>> the split package (that requires such modules be locally connected 
>>> and loaded by the same class loader).
>>> Thanks
>>> Mandy

More information about the security-dev mailing list