|
Loading...
|
java-dev@lists.apple.com
[Prev] Thread [Next] | [Prev] Date [Next]
Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Josh Marinacci Tue Apr 03 20:00:23 2012
The short version is: there will be a Java 7 for Mac. It will come from Oracle/Sun, not Apple, and it will update itself. Thus it will be just like the JRE on Windows and Linux. However, they still recommend bundling a JRE with your app instead of the system install. Also, if you want to put a Java app in the Mac App Store, then you must bundle a JRE. JRE = end user copy of Java. Fairly small (Windows version has usually been in the 7 to 10mb range) JDK = developer copy of Java, including compiler, tools, etc. Huge. > 50MB. Regarding the app bundling tools, I have this Ant task which will make a .app bundle for a Java app on today's Mac OSX (Lion), but it will not embed a JRE. This tool also will export an EXE or JNLP or double clickable jar. http://joshondesign.com/2012/02/26/AppBundler_new_project I'm going to donate my code to a larger project on Java.net that will be similar and also support JRE embedding on Java 7+. I hope this clears things up. - Josh -- Josh Marinacci joshondesign.com On Tuesday, April 3, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Michael Hall wrote: > > On Apr 3, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Joshua Smith wrote: > > This is no longer correct: > > > > On Apr 3, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Michael Hall wrote: > > > On OS X we have been told that openjdk desktop applications will include > > > a bundled jdk/jre. Not optional. Not possible to omit. If my > > > understanding of that is correct. Discussion of it might be better > > > brought up on the openjdk list. Although if I'm completely wrong someone > > > might want to indicate that here, to not leave the wrong impression with > > > those not following that list. > > > > See: > > http://skovatch.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/supporting-java-applications-on-os-x/ > > > > I did read this. Possibly due to not completely understanding the jdk/jre > division it didn't totally clear things up for me. I do not remember seeing > openjdk list mention of a update supporting application separate runtimes. If > there is functionality that is going to be added to the openjdk launcher code > that will allow this separate runtimes this would pretty much invalidate the > launcher code I made available. Which is pretty much just the parts I like of > a couple generations of the openjdk JavaAppLauncher pasted together anyhow. > If this is going to get more into a discussion then moving it to openjdk > might be better. > > > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Java-dev mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/java-dev/joshua%40marinacci.org > > This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Java-dev mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/java-dev/alexiscircle%40gmail.com This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 - Michael Hall Brian Davies 2012/04/03
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Michael Hall 2012/04/03
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Joshua Smith 2012/04/03
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Michael Hall 2012/04/03
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Josh Marinacci 2012/04/03 <=
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Michael Hall 2012/04/03
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Josh Marinacci 2012/04/05
- Re: Gatekeeper on MacOS 10.7 Michael Hall 2012/04/05