Hi Omair,
Also, the lines after "java version" make OpenJDK explicit, no? Is this
second line not sufficient to distinguish OpenJDK vs closed builds?
# java -version
java version "1.7.0_25"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (fedora-2.3.10.3.fc19-ppc64) <--- this line
OpenJDK 64-Bit Zero VM (build 23.7-b01, interpreted mode)
we needed to account for java -fullversion as well, which btw. is a one
liner.
Perhaps it's worth borrowing the style from IBM [1]? They do this:
Changing any of these lines is very painful, because too many scripts
and tests have
made assumptions on these lines, and some of these are System properties
which
are baked at build time.
I checked this on our internal jdk build and it is correct,
% xxxxxxxxx/bin/java -version
openjdk version "1.7.0"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0-b146)
OpenJDK Server VM (build 21.0-b16, mixed mode)
java -fullversion
java full version "JRE 1.6.0 IBM Windows 32 build pwi3260-20071123_01"
java -version
java version "1.5.0"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build
pwi32devifx-20071025 (SR6b))
IBM J9 VM (build 2.3, J2RE 1.5.0 IBM J9 2.3 Windows XP x86-32
j9vmwi3223-20071007 (JIT enabled)
--------->8--------
They still keep "java" as the first word, but add additional information
(in the same line for -fullversion but in the next line for -version).
It was decided the OpenJDK launcher name to be openjdk as well, there
were discussions of course surounding this, but I can't remember.
Any pointers to those discussions?
Unfortunately no, this dates back to pre OpenJDK and Sun days.
Kumar
Thanks,
Omair
[1]
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/javasdk/tools/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.java.doc.igaa/_1vg00011e17d8ea-1163a087e6c-7ffe_1001.html
