On 2018-02-12T11:44:07 +0000 Mark Raynsford <org.open...@io7m.com> wrote:
> Hello! > > As a long time Java developer, I've only ever had to deal with signing > jar files. I can obviously sign jar files once on whatever platform I > choose to use to build the code, and then distribute the jars to all > platforms. Build once, run everywhere, etc. > > However, now that jlink exists, as a developer I have to deal with > signing platform-specific executables. For example, if I distribute a > macOS application produced with jlink, that executable will produce a > large warning message: Seeing as I've had no response, is it safe to assume that this subject isn't permitted here? I was hoping there'd be some discussion of platform-independent ways to produce correctly-signed jlink distributions... Right now, just using jlink at all means you (probably) have to go back to building code on each individual platform in order to get access to proprietary platform-specific signing tools. This kind of reduces the utility of being able to specify another platform's JVM with --module-path, because the resulting distribution won't really be usable thanks to the erosion of the ability to run unsigned binaries on some platforms. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
