Oracle has early access builds of jdk8u released at :

https://jdk8.java.net/download.html

JDK-8022291 is fixed in this ea release.

Regards,
Sean.

On 03/04/17 20:11, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
Yes that is really good. I was really happy to see that. I can’t wait for a 
Java 8 release that contains the fix (u121 on the mac does not). The reason I 
brought it up is because that long standing weird error message is resolved 
using the attach api to add the agent. I’m sure I’m not the only person to have 
realized this.

Alasdair

On Apr 3, 2017, at 2:41 PM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote:

On 03/04/2017 18:52, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:

Hi,

I’m the lead for WebSphere Liberty at IBM. Liberty uses a java agent, and this 
proposal will affect us. Our Java Agent is used to update the bytecode of our classes 
to add in instrumentation for debug logging and performance monitoring. In general it 
is attached via -javaagent, which wont be affected by this proposal. However there is 
one case where we do a dynamic attach of this agent. There is an industry trend 
towards running the application server as an uber-jar using java -jar 
<jar.name>. To support this in Liberty (in common with other application 
servers) our main method extracts the app server to disk at startup before 
bootstrapping the server from extracted jar files. One of the jar files extracted in 
this way is our Java agent, so we use the attach API to attach it so we get 
monitoring and debug logging. I had been thinking of expanding this to use the attach 
api in preference to -javaagent because that gets rid of this spurious error message 
from the mac JVM:

objc[56755]: Class JavaLaunchHelper is implemented in both 
/Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_121.jdk/Contents/Home/bin/java 
(0x10f4464c0) and 
/Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_121.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/lib/libinstrument.dylib
 (0x110dbb4e0). One of the two will be used. Which one is undefined.
Thanks for the mail on your usage. On the spurious message then this was this 
was  JDK-8022291 and has been fixed since jdk-9+127. The change has also been 
back-ported to jdk8u-dev.

-Alan

Reply via email to