Hi, I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-9115.
This is really a stupid thing for the SimplePostTool command line interface to use this class just to encode something with Base64 (while not requiring external dependencies), since Solr requires Java 8 minimum where java.util.Base64 is shipped with! I think this dates back to Java 7 times... Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler uschind...@apache.org ASF Member, Apache Lucene PMC / Committer Bremen, Germany http://lucene.apache.org/ > -----Original Message----- > From: jigsaw-dev [mailto:jigsaw-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On Behalf > Of Uwe Schindler > Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 5:19 PM > To: jigsaw-...@openjdk.java.net > Cc: rory.odonn...@oracle.com; dev@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: Java 9 build 118 is hiding some documented & public classes from > unnamed module > > Thanks Alan, > > so this means we should better remove the references to the mentioned > class from the Apache Solr code if not needed (I don't think we need the Java > EE features here, it might be an oversight). I just wonder why Javac > succeeded in our case to build. I have to dig. > > For now I added "-addmods java.se.ee" to our build server's testing Java > configuration, to be able to test build 118. > > Is it planned to have those classes disabled for pre-Java-9 apps by default in > Java 9? Would't it be better for standard unnamed classpath apps to "fall > back" in a backwards compatible way? > > In addition, the Javadocs don't say anything about which modules are visible > by default. I think this should be added, too. > > Uwe > > ----- > Uwe Schindler > uschind...@apache.org > ASF Member, Apache Lucene PMC / Committer > Bremen, Germany > http://lucene.apache.org/ > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alan Bateman [mailto:alan.bate...@oracle.com] > > Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 4:45 PM > > To: Uwe Schindler <uschind...@apache.org>; jigsaw- > d...@openjdk.java.net > > Cc: rory.odonn...@oracle.com; dev@lucene.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Java 9 build 118 is hiding some documented & public classes > from > > unnamed module > > > > On 16/05/2016 15:28, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > > : > > > > > > This is not the only class that’s missing at runtime, there are more: I do > not > > have the complete list, but our checks using the forbiddenapis > > Ant/Maven/Gradle plugin fails to load classes around JAXB/XML > > (javax.xml.bind.*, javax.jws.*) and CORBA (org.omg.CORBA.*), but also > > "javax.activation.ActivationDataFlavor". But there may be more packages > > missing. > > > > > jdk-9+118 is the first JDK 9 build to have the policy for root modules > > that is described in JEP 261. This has been changed in the Jigsaw EA > > builds some time and only merged into the main line for build 118. I > > hope to send mail to jdk9-dev shortly about this - we know it will be a > > surprise to some. > > > > As to what is going on? The java.corba and the EE modules are no longer > > resolved by default when compiling code in the unnamed module or where > > the main class is loaded from class path. This means the types in these > > modules are not visible. Nothing has been removed and if you run with > > `-addmods java.se.ee` then each of the Java EE modules will be resolved > > as they were previously. We have updated text for JEP 261 that describes > > this in more detail, along with the rational. We will likely assess the > > impact of this change later in JDK 9 but for now, there is easy > > workaround for those that depend on these components being in the JDK. > > > > -Alan > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
