michael-hoke commented on code in PR #1057:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil/pull/1057#discussion_r1327536811
##########
build.sbt:
##########
@@ -211,6 +214,67 @@ lazy val testStdLayout =
Project("daffodil-test-stdLayout", file("test-stdLayout
.dependsOn(tdmlProc % "test")
.settings(commonSettings, nopublish)
+/* Workaround: certain reflection (used by JAXB) isn't allowed by default in
JDK 17:
+ *
https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/17/migrate/migrating-jdk-8-later-jdk-releases.html#GUID-7BB28E4D-99B3-4078-BDC4-FC24180CE82B
+ *
+ * While we can handle this JVM quirk at build time, at runtime we won't know
+ * a user's JVM version. We'll provide documentation and an extension setting
+ * to add these flags to the extension-launched debugger backend.
+ */
+lazy val extraJvmOptions: Seq[String] =
+ if (scala.util.Properties.isJavaAtLeast("17"))
+ Seq(
+ "--add-opens",
+ "java.base/java.lang=ALL-UNNAMED",
+ )
+ else Seq()
+
+lazy val xjcSettings =
+ Seq(
+ libraryDependencies ++= Seq(
+ "com.sun.xml.bind" % "jaxb-impl" % "2.2.11",
+ "javax.activation" % "activation" % "1.1.1",
+ "org.glassfish.jaxb" % "jaxb-xjc" % "2.2.11",
+ ),
+ xjcCommandLine += "-nv",
+ xjcCommandLine += "-p",
+ xjcCommandLine += "org.apache.daffodil.tdml",
+ xjcBindings += "daffodil-tdml-lib/src/main/resources/bindings.xjb",
+ xjcLibs := Seq(
+ "org.glassfish.jaxb" % "jaxb-xjc" % "2.2.11",
+ "com.sun.xml.bind" % "jaxb-impl" % "2.2.11",
+ "javax.activation" % "activation" % "1.1.1",
+ ),
+ xjcJvmOpts ++= extraJvmOptions,
+ Compile / xjc / sources := Seq(
+ // Need to refer to the individual files because we do not want
XMLSchema to go through the JAXB compliation
Review Comment:
This change looks like it would work for the extension. There was a change
related to namespaces that I'm not thrilled about, but that can more than
likely be fixed with a couple more code changes...
We are not planning to support internal schemas in the extension. One of the
features we are looking to implement is to provide the ability to package the
TDML schema and the DFDL schema in a zip archive, which directly conflicts with
having an internal schema, so I don't think we'd be looking at that even for
the longer term.
We currently don't support configs in the extension at all, as far as I
know... Even if we were to add them in, there's no reason for us to not use
them externally, as we're already using the schema.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
