If you are only looking for the version, would JAVA_VERSION satisfy your need? JAVA_FULL_VERSION is only present in JDK and JRE image but not custom image since the property is supplied by the jdk build.
Mandy > On Aug 9, 2016, at 9:49 AM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote: > > No, I haven't considered that. Thank you, Mandy. Good tip. And I see that > file also contains JAVA_FULL_VERSION, whose value is identical to the > -fullversion option output. > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Mandy Chung <mandy.ch...@oracle.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 8, 2016, at 8:51 AM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > However, I would like to propose bringing back the option with a different > > purpose. I would like to use --version:<version> as a validation check. I > > want Java to execute ONLY if the version specified matches the actual > > platform version. This would be a wonderful help to scripts that require a > > particular version of the Java platform, and should fail if the environment > > has been accidentally setup with the wrong Java platform version. > > > > Examples: > > java --version:9 > > java --version:9.1 > > > > AFAICT, the only way to do this now is to execute Java twice. Once to pipe > > --version to some find/grep command and check return code, and then execute > > java again if the check pass. Loading the runtime twice is not optimal, > > wouldn't you agree? Yet if you agree to this proposal, it would be a big > > win for script writers, I believe. > > Have you considered checking the JAVA_VERSION property in $JAVA_HOME/release > file? jlink creates the `release` file containing certain properties about > the runtime image. > > Mandy >
