Openjdk 8 Support

[siriux]

Do you plan to add Openjdk 8 support ?

If so, it would be interesting for me to have an option for Small VM. http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/148

Thanks, Pablo

[alexkasko]

Yes, I'm going to add OpenJDK 8 support before it will be released. I never tried Small VM, I'll look at it.

[siriux]

That's great !

If you want, you can also have a look at the compact profiles, that together with Small VM will allow to have really small jre to be deployed with an application.

https://blogs.oracle.com/jtc/entry/a_first_look_at_compact

Thanks, Pablo

[IceMan81]

Alex, any plans on putting out an openjdk 8 build?

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 3/25/14, IceMan81 notifications@github.com wrote:

Alex, any plans on putting out an openjdk 8 build?

Yes, I am preparing openjdk 8 builds, going to publish them in some weeks. Some more information in this maiilist thread

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-38633938

-Alex

[ghost]

Hi

Is there anything wrong with OpenJDK 8? My editor uses Java2D and I've found a bug in the old X11 renderer: https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13850 Unfortunately, nobody will fix it as it is only reproducible under Mageia Linux and as the new XRender pipeline is used by default in Java 1.8.

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 08/04/2014 12:27 PM, Julien Gouesse wrote:

Hi

Is there anything wrong with OpenJDK 8?

[Assuming you are asking about builds, not about 8 itself]

Unfortunately OpenJDK 8 build system cleanup changed a lot of small details like binaries target directories, arch naming etc. And this broke compatibility with build/bundle/installer scripts I used for 6 and 7 and my attempt to "quickfix" the scripts failed miserably on Windows. So nothing is wrong with 8 itself - just more work is required to adapt builds for it. I am still on it but do not have estimates right now.

My editor uses Java2D and I've found a bug in the old X11 renderer: https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13850 Unfortunately, nobody will fix it as it is only reproducible under Mageia Linux and as the new XRender pipeline is used by default in Java 1.8.

Cannot really comment on this issue, as I myself still use Java 7 and 6.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-51035290

-Alex

[ghost]

Thank you for your reply. I found a workaround for this bug. I can go on using OpenJDK 1.7 but I have to force the use of the XRender pipeline which is a bit less stable in 1.7 than in 1.8.

[siriux]

Any news on the OpenJDK 8 builds?

Thanks !

[alexkasko]

Hi,

Sorry, I am still on it, but cannot give any real estimates. OpenJDK 8 builds are quite easy, but automation scripts still need work and testing.

On 09/30/2014 07:50 AM, Pablo Guerrero Rosel wrote:

Any news on the OpenJDK 8 builds?

Thanks !

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-57273784

-Alex

[siriux]

Thanks for the update.

[codespotx]

alex,

i am interested in building openjdk8 for windows. could you commit your intermediate results to a branch? maybe someone will continue or help (creating tickets that describe the remaining problems might make this easier).

thx, csp

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 10/06/2014 12:36 PM, codespotx wrote:

alex,

i am interested in building openjdk8 for windows.

If you want just to build binaries manually - it quite simple for jdk8, just dumping (possibly) useful related links here:

http://www.royvanrijn.com/blog/2013/10/building-openjdk-on-windows/ http://betoweb.com.br/blog/2013/07/12/building-openjdk-on-ms-windows-8/ http://lhochet.blogspot.fr/2013/01/building-java-8-on-windows.html http://stas-blogspot.blogspot.com/2012/09/building-openjdk-on-windows.html https://weblogs.java.net/blog/simonis/archive/2011/10/28/yaojowbi-yet-another-openjdk-windows-build-instruction

https://blogs.oracle.com/poonam/entry/building_openjdk_on_windows http://www.martin-toshev.com/index.php/software-engineering/tips-and-tricks/79-building-openjdk-under-ubuntu-and-window-7-8 https://github.com/martinfmi/openJDK_Ubuntu_12.04_Eclipse

I also can answer specific build questions.

could you commit your intermediate results to a branch?

Pushed branch from June, it may be not very useful though - https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/tree/openjdk8

maybe someone will continue or help (creating tickets that describe the remaining problems might make this easier).

I do not have clear picture of the tasks. Automated build scripts are quite messy and too specific to jdk6/7 directory layouts. The whole idea of standalone winsdk7.1 toolchain is broken in jdk8 by autoconf checks. Installer descriptors generation is a one big hack. I am also not sure about the usefulness of linux/mac installers at all.

thx, csp

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-58005093

-Alex

[codespotx]

alex,

I managed to fix the 64bit windows build for jdk8 by fixing a cascade of (more or less obvious) autoconf problems (can send you the details, but its too much for this comment). No binaries needed to be changed. just used master branch of openjdk-unofficial-builds and this source http://www.java.net/download/openjdk/jdk8/promoted/b132/openjdk-8-src-b132-03_mar_2014.zip.

As a result I created build8-windows-amd64.bat (based on build-windows-amd64.bat) see http://pastebin.com/3ULiBMF9 it can still use some cleanup. conversion to build8-windows-i586.bat should be easy.

that the following steps lead to a proper image build

..\openjdk-unofficial-builds\build8-windows-amd64.bat
./configure --with-freetype-include=$XALT_FREETYPE_HEADERS_PATH --with-freetype-lib=$XALT_FREETYPE_LIB_PATH --with-msvcr-dll=$XALT_MSVCRNN_DLL_PATH/msvcr100.dll --with-cacerts-file=$XALT_CACERTS_FILE --enable-unlimited-crypto
make all

I am not interested in the installer as I like java as portable as this build environment, so there might be more issues.

regards, csp

PS: some of your links are dead. I used to "official" spec in the repo "README-builds.html", it helped a bit. and you were right about the branch...

[scottwillmoore]

Hi,

With Java 9 on the horizon do you think we will be seeing an openjdk 8 unoffical build soon? I help out the opensource project (scoop)[http://scoop.sh/] and it relies on pre-built binaries to use and install. It currently uses your Java 7 binaries as an open source alternative to the oracle jdk, otherwise how hard would you think it would be for me to create and distribute a windows openjdk binary myself?

Thanks, Scott

[alexkasko]

Hi

On 12/23/2014 02:50 PM, Scott Will Moore wrote:

Hi, With Java 9 on the horizon do you think we will be seeing an openjdk 8 unoffical build soon?

Yes, java moving faster now then some years ago. As java 8 is less then one year old this situation is quite unusual in java world, where java 6 ruled for almost 6 years.

The current plan is to release jdk8 builds without installers on linux and mac (and probably without debug builds - they and installers can be added later). I won't do any promises about dates, though.

I help out the opensource project (scoop)[http://scoop.sh/] and it relies on pre-built binaries to use and install. It currently uses your Java 7 binaries as an open source alternative to the oracle jdk, otherwise how hard would you think it would be for me to create and distribute a windows openjdk binary myself?

With jdk8 the build process became easy even on windows. The only problem on windows can be FreeType libs, but you can get prebuilt binaries from openjdk7 branch of this repo.

Thanks, Scott

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-67957931

-Alex

[scottwillmoore]

Thank you for the update. As for scoop only a windows build is actually required, and does not require an installer, but just a extractable zip. So it would be fantastic if JDK builds could be released soon. :smile:

Otherwise I just had a brief look at building the JDK manually and it appears to be rather simple, with the main issues lying in installing the dependencies. I believe however that it will be much safer to include the JDK built by you as it is used by many others, and can be well tested.

Anyway, thanks for the update.

[ghost]

@alexkasko Please can you indicate whether your builds will support JavaFX/OpenJFX on all platforms? Do you plan to include the OpenGL ES 2 backend for Windows too? Maybe this comment can help a bit: https://jogamp.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=607#c19

Do you need some help for mirroring? Sometimes it is impossible to download your builds. Thank you very much for the good work :)

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 01/04/2015 11:23 AM, Julien Gouesse wrote:

@alexkasko Please can you indicate whether your builds will support JavaFX/OpenJFX on all platforms? Do you plan to include the OpenGL ES 2 backend for Windows too? Maybe this comment can help a bit: https://jogamp.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=607#c19

Not going to include OpenJFX and additional libs, it can be useful, but I will try to keep these builds as close to vanilla OpenJDK as possible. Currently only essential things (cacerts and fonts) are added.

Do you need some help for mirroring? Sometimes it is impossible to download your builds.

I am not sure here, all the downloads are served from bitbucket (except the very first version that was uploaded to github) and should be quite stable. As the checksums are stored in repo on github I think it is quite safe to have mirrors (can add links to mirror if you'll create one).

Thank you very much for the good work :)

Your are welcome

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-68629507

-Alex

[ghost]

Thank you for your answers, I understand your position, you want to keep it as simple as possible.

Actually, this one is often hard to download, it stops after a few seconds: https://bitbucket.org/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/downloads/openjdk-1.7.0-u60-unofficial-windows-i586-image.zip

I'll see with other JogAmp contributors if they agree with storing your builds into jogamp/deployment (with full credits to you of course).

[alexkasko]

On 01/04/2015 12:45 PM, Julien Gouesse wrote:

Thank you for your answers, I understand your position, you want to keep it as simple as possible.

Yes, it is very easy to get public distribution wrong (like it was with virus in jdk6 win32 builds and with broken png in IcedTea) so I'll try to alter (improve) these builds as little as possible.

Actually, this one is often hard to download, it stops after a few seconds: https://bitbucket.org/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/downloads/openjdk-1.7.0-u60-unofficial-windows-i586-image.zip

Interesting, I tried this file and download speed was unstable (varied from 20kbps to 1.5mbps), at least the download was successful. Maybe some Amazon throttling.

I'll see with other JogAmp contributors if they agree with storing your builds into jogamp/deployment (with full credits to you of course).

Great, I think naming of the binaries is descriptive enough so I will be able to add a single link on top of README.md to the web listing of the mirror (instead of links to every file).

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-68631644

-Alex

[bhavyamanasa]

hi, I am using openjdk-1.7.0-u60-unofficial-windows-amd64-installer in windows8 it is working fine for java SE, but got struck for java EE (not responding) may i know why??

Thanks in advance.

[ghost]

@bhavyamanasa Which J2EE container do you use? You can use JVisualVM or JStack to determine where it is "stuck".

[kg5000]

Any updates on a 32 bit OpenJDK 8 build? I scrounged around and only see 1.6 and 1.7 builds.

Many Thanks!

Ken

[djx314]

+1

[codespotx]

@kg5000 @djx314 as I commented already Oct 2014 I have the jdk 8 build up and running. but mr kasko showed no interest in my findings... i can upload my 1.8.0_51 (32/64) images if you like.

[codespotx]

@siriux (very late reply) Compact Profiles (JEP 161) are not supported in windows build (this is was oracle calls "Delivered")

$ make profiles Error: The Java SE 8 Compact Profiles are only implemented for Linux at this time

Small VM (JEP 148) also looks like a linux thing (libjvm.so, gcc), and they actually failed to reduce the libjvm.so size accordingly (oracle calls this "Completed").

[siriux]

@codespotx

Thanks for your findings. I guess that with OpenJDK 8 I'll have to remove the things from rt.jar by hand, and keep the usual tricks I'm using on OpenJDK 7. At least they provide a list of classes that can be removed safely, so no more trial and error.

Not urgent for me, but I would love to see alex builds for OpenJDK 8 to start experimenting with it.

Cheers

[alexkasko]

@kg5000 @djx314

Sorry, no updates from me, situation with jdk8 builds is still unclear.

@codespotx

Won't you mind contacting me over email about jdk8 builds?

-Alex

[codespotx]

@alexkasko you got mail.

[jimfb]

@alexkasko I'll buy you a pizza if you get the java8 build out soon... please!!!

Seriously though, I think you're the only one who has a snowball's chance of making it work. Any chance you could sit down for a few hours this week and take a look at it?

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 12/03/2015 05:15 AM, Jim wrote:

@alexkasko I'll buy you a pizza if you get the java8 build out soon... please!!!

Not that I am opposing the idea :) , but still cannot say anything definitive on jdk8. And it just became actual again with jdk9 moved to 2017.

If you'll want to build a jdk8 tarball (not installer) for a single platform yourself, I think I will be able to give some detailed instructions/scripts, jdk8 made a lot of things easier. But all platforms, installers, debug builds and desirable regression test runs add some overhead.

Seriously though, I think you're the only one who has a snowball's chance of making it work. Any chance you could sit down for a few hours this week and take a look at it?

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-161516473

-Alex

[IceMan81]

FYI, you can get openjdk 8 build from Azul @ http://zulu.org/download/. I've been using Azul Zulu open jdk builds for a while now.

[djx314]

@IceMan81 zulu just have openjdk 8 build for win 64, not for win 32. But I need to a win 32 openjdk 8 for my server.

[IceMan81]

@djx314 I think I saw on their forum that if you contact them about a win 32 jdk 8 build, you can get one.

[alexkasko]

On 12/16/2015 03:56 AM, Gesly George wrote:

FYI, you can get openjdk 8 build from Azul @ http://zulu.org/download/. I've been using Azul Zulu open jdk builds for a while now.

Zulu is quite popular, but IMO it is closer to Oracle builds than to manual ones as their source code repo is not public (they still follow GPL correctly of course). Also no public bugtracker. For those who interested in technical details this link may be useful - https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/mechanical-sympathy/jQGahuzJKM4/ydeNt56mRYkJ (this is from Azul CTO but this is not a marketing speech).

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-164983901

-Alex

[iswardasa]

@IceMan81 : 32 bit azul ? i havn't asked them. there are still quite a bit of 32 bit machines that are out there. after researching, it turns out that zulu intends to distribute to 32-bit architectures saying that it is on their "roadmap". for now, voting on this ( https://support.azulsystems.com/hc/communities/public/questions/200917154-Need-for-32-bit-JDK-JRE ) feature request is recommended by them to stimulate development.

[iswardasa]

developing using openjdk7 may still be attractive for those targeting older machines IMHO .

[coin3x]

any ETA?

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 03/13/2016 10:31 AM, Coin wrote:

any ETA?

There is a good chance for the windows-only release in late April/early May aligned with Oracle JDK updates that should be released in April. I'll update this issue with more info in some weeks.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/alexkasko/openjdk-unofficial-builds/issues/17#issuecomment-195930883

-Alex

[ghost]

@alexkasko Thanks, it will be better than nothing. I hope that you'll succeed in making it work for Linux and OS X too.

[desertkun]

Indeed waiting for this. Thank you in advance!

[erickwill]

@alexkasko Thank you very much for your nice job! Looking forward for updates to Linux, specially openjdk 8.

[desertkun]

@alexkasko Would really appreciate any news about opejdk 8 builds.

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 04/09/2016 10:12 PM, desertkun wrote:

@alexkasko Would really appreciate any news about opejdk 8 builds.

The current plan is to release jdk8 windows-x86_64 build at the end of the month. This build is going to be done not from upstream sources, but from OpenJDK sources used in RHEL 7 (that are available through CentOS repos). The goal it to have windows build as close as possible to java-1.8.0-openjdk from RHEL to cover the use-case "develop on Windows - deploy on RHEL/CentOS".

That win-x86_64 build is going to be thoroughly tested and updated once in three months after each Oracle CPU release.

Other platforms (win-x86, macosx-x86_64, linux-x86_64, linux-arm32) for that build (from the same sources and using the same build scripts) may be added in future, but they won't be tested/updated on the same level as win-x86_64 one.

-Alex

[erickwill]

@alexkasko Thanks for your nice work! Could you please try to advance version 1.8.0 also to linux? It would be great :)

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 04/12/2016 08:42 PM, erickwill wrote:

@alexkasko Thanks for your nice work! Could you please try to advance version 1.8.0 also to linux? It would be great :)

You are welcome, just to collect some opinions on that point - what's wrong with java-1.8.0-openjdk on RHEL/CentOS/Fedora and their derivatives? It has the same level of updates/testing/stability as Oracle JDK and additionally has some nice features like using system tzdata. And it shouldn't be hard to use it in Docker on non-RHEL-flavoured distros.

Does your use-case require shipping "portable linux app" with jre included (so neither docker nor "yum install java-1.8.0-openjdk" are possible)?

-Alex

[erickwill]

@alexkasko I use it under Arch Linux to build Android AOSP. Your builds seems to work faster to build AOSP, besides I prefer to know exactly what is installed plus where is it installed, what it doesn't happen when I install the one available at the repository. For this main reason I pick your builds.

[alexkasko]

Hi,

On 04/12/2016 09:09 PM, erickwill wrote:

@alexkasko I use it under Arch Linux to build Android AOSP.

Thanks for the details, that is useful to understand user needs better.

Your builds seems to work faster to build AOSP,

I can assure you that wasn't intentional :) . I mean all openjdk-based builds for x86_64 have more or less the same performance characteristics (as VM impl is the same). And newer (jdk8 vs jdk7) builds are generally slightly faster than older ones.

besides I prefer to know exactly what is installed plus where is it installed, what it doesn't happen when I install the one available at the repository. For this main reason I pick your builds.

On Linux, have you considered using something like:

dnf builddep java-1.8.0-openjdk # just the Arch flavour of it instead of fedora one hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/ cd jdk8u ./get_source.sh bash ./make/scripts/hgforest.sh checkout bash ./configure make images cp -a build/linux-x86_64-normal-server-release/images/j2sdk-image path/to/my/jdk

After that the only bit you may require to change it to update empty cacerts file in jre/lib/security/cacerts. That is generally how the Linux builds I published are done. The one big difference is that Linux generally have quite weak guarantees about binary compatibility in userspace libs. So building from sources locally with the same gcc/glibc all other libs are using is likely will be a way safer (about the things like crashes in X11-related code) than using the same sources built with an ancient gcc/glibc (that all the "portable" openjdk builds are doing).

-Alex

[ghost]

Would it work under Mageia Linux?

[alexkasko]

On 04/13/2016 11:58 AM, Julien Gouesse wrote:

Would it work under Mageia Linux?

Yes, some configuration switches may be required in some cases (like --with-boot-jdk or --with-extra-cflags) but generally that configure+make method should work on any glibc-based x86_64 Linux.

-Alex