On 04/16/2018 09:32 AM, Bas Couwenberg wrote:
> On 2018-04-16 08:18, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> it seems something has changed with openfx since the errors below are
>> all mentioning something like "import javafx. ...". Do you have any
>> hint how this can be fixed?
> There is no OpenJFX for OpenJDK 9, see:
indeed Java 9 removed some packages from *core* java and were moved to
additional modules to add at compilation/runtime.
Problem is this is not transparent/compatible with java <= 8.
So, to support java 9 AND below, you need specific scripts that detect
java version and act accordingly. This is not really cool to do and
As proposed, either javafx can be removed from code, either we shoud
stick to Java 9 and superior and add the javafx module.
there is an example in biojava4 for a build.xml:
<junit haltonfailure="yes" printsummary="yes" fork="true">
<jvmarg line="--add-modules java.se.ee"/>
this example used java.se.ee module.
For javafx, there are several modules :
* Base APIs for JavaFX UI Toolkit — javafx.base
* JavaFX APIs for UI Controls — javafx.controls
* JavaFX APIs for FXML — javafx.fxml
* JavaFX APIs for various Graphics Tools— javafx.graphics
* JavaFX APIs for Multimedia — javafx.media
* JavaFX APIs for Swing-JavaFX Interoperability — javafx.swing
* JavaFX APIs for WebView Functionality — javafx.web
To add multiple modules, one need to separate them with comma.
> If the package works without JavaFX you should consider disabling that
> for the time being.
> You can also explicitly build with OpenJDK 8, but that will just get
> you a different RC bug because openjdk-8 will not be in buster.
> Kind Regards,
Univ Rennes, Inria, CNRS, IRISA
Irisa, Campus de Beaulieu
F-35042 RENNES - FRANCE
gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org)
Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438