Re: [Approved] RFR: 8233421: Upgrade to Visual Studio 2017 version 15.9.16

On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 23:31:34 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > [JDK-8233421](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233421) > > This bumps the windows compiler version to VS2017 version 15.9.16 to match > JDK 14. I have run a full build and test, including WebKit and media. > >

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8232063: Upgrade gradle to version 6.0

On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 15:22:48 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > This PR upgrades the version of gradle used to build JavaFX to 6.0. In > addition to keeping up to date, this will allow us to subsequently upgrade > the boot JDK to JDK 13. > > This change does the following: > > 1. Use ivy

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8231188: Update SQLite to version 3.30.1

On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:17:05 GMT, Arun Joseph wrote: > We currently use SQLite version 3.28.0. We should update to the latest stable > release version 3.30.1 released. > https://www.sqlite.org/index.html > > > > Commits: > - 24c6375d: 8231188: Update SQLite to version 3.30.1

Re: RFR: 8231188: Update SQLite to version 3.30.1

On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 19:23:03 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:17:05 GMT, Arun Joseph > wrote: > >> We currently use SQLite version 3.28.0. We should update to the latest >> stable release version 3.30.1 released. >> https://www.sqlite.org/index.html >> >>

Re: [Integrated] RFR: 8232943: Gesture support is not initialized on iOS

Changeset: dca8df4e Author:Jose Pereda Committer: Johan Vos Date: 2019-10-29 10:03:54 + URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/commit/dca8df4e 8232943: Gesture support is not initialized on iOS Reviewed-by: jvos ! modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/native-glass/ios

Re: RFR: 8087980: Add property to disable Monocle cursor

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:03:46 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:03:42 GMT, Dell Green > <12861109+dellgr...@users.noreply.github.com> wrote: > >> Often on embedded systems a cursor is not a valid input modality. On some of >> these systems, when the javafx toolkit initialises

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8232943: Gesture support is not initialized on iOS

On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:29:16 GMT, Jose Pereda wrote: > This PR only affects iOS native code. > > JBS issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232943 > > Since the `IosGestureSupport` class is only instantiated from the native > side, the proposal is to change in

Re: [Integrated] RFR: 8232929: Duplicate symbols when building static libraries

Changeset: ac71396c Author:Johan Vos Date: 2019-10-24 21:31:08 + URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/commit/ac71396c 8232929: Duplicate symbols when building static libraries Reviewed-by: kcr ! modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/native-prism-sw/JNIUtil.c ! modules

Re: Request for permission to backport fixes to jfx-11

Looking a bit deeper into it, it seems there are some related issues that might be caused by the same root cause, or by this fix. I'll request to backport it once we have more insight about the potential regressions. - Johan On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 1:47 PM Johan Vos wrote: > I'm

RFR: 8232929: Duplicate symbols when building static libraries

This PR only affects native code in the prism-sw pipeline. JBS issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232929 Commits: - 9afeca00: Avoid name clashes when creating static libraries. Prefix exposed functions. Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/21/files

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8232158: [macOS] Fallback to command line tools if xcode is missing

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 05:52:33 GMT, Arunprasad Rajkumar wrote: > 8232158: [macOS] Fallback to command line tools if xcode is missing > > > > Commits: > - 063d2f38: JDK-8232158: [macOS] Fallback to command line tools if xcode is > missing > > Changes:

Re: Request for permission to backport fixes to jfx-11

erre > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193502 > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8179073 > [3] https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/456 > [4] https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/222 > > man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 14:39 skrev Ke

Re: [Integrated] RFR: 8232687: No static JNI loader for libprism-sw

Changeset: 2ae171a2 Author:Johan Vos Date: 2019-10-22 11:44:12 + URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/commit/2ae171a2 8232687: No static JNI loader for libprism-sw Reviewed-by: kcr ! buildSrc/mac.gradle ! modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/native-prism-sw/JNIUtil.c

duplicate symbols in static libraries

Hi, When creating static libraries for the native parts of JavaFX, I ran into an issue with symbols exposed in more than 1 library: checkAndClearException() is declared and used in both libjavafx_font.a and in libprism_sw.a I have a simple fix for this that adds a prefix to the symbol in the

Re: [Rev 01] RFR: 8232687: No static JNI loader for libprism-sw

The pull request has been updated with additional changes. Added commits: - f34a99a3: In order to leverage this on Mac, we need to add -DSTATIC_BUILD to the cc flags Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/19/files - new:

Request for permission to backport fixes to jfx-11

Hi Kevin, I request permission to backport the following issues to the jfx-11 repository. All patches apply clean or with minor changes (e.g. build.properties must keep jfx.release.major.version to 11) Thanks, - Johan https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221302 : Upgrade to gcc 8.2 on

RFR: 8232687: No static JNI loader for libprism-sw

This PR adds a JNI_OnLoad_prism_sw call to the static lib libprism_sw.a. This approach is similar to the addition of e.g. JNI_OnLoad_prism_es2 that has been done as part of https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223760 Unless -PSTATIC_BUILD is provided when building, this patch has no

RFR: 8232597: release notes 13.0.1

Hi Kevin, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8232597/webrev.01/ which fixes https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232597 Thanks, - Johan

RFR: 8232378: change JavaFX release version in 13-dev to 13.0.1

Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8232378/webrev.00/ which fixes https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232378 Thanks, - Johan

RFR: 8232377: Change JavaFX release version in 11-dev to 11.0.5

Please review the webrev for bumpding the JavaFX release version for 11-dev to 11.0.5 [1], available at [ 2] Thanks, - Johan [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232377 [2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8232377/webrev.00/

Re: [14] RFR: Request to sync October 2019 CPU changes into jfx

+1 On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 6:42 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Johan and Phil, > > I request approval to sync changes from to the just-released October > 2019 CPU release into 'jfx'. Here is the aggregate set of changes for > the fixes: > >

Re: [11][13] RFR: Request to backport October 2019 CPU changes

+1 On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 6:43 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Hi Johan, > > I request approval to backport the changes from the just-released April > 2019 CPU to 11-dev and 13-dev. > > https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/cpu-1910-sync/11-dev/webrev/ >

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8218640: Update ICU4C to version 64.2

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:25:54 GMT, Arun Joseph wrote: > We currently use ICU4C version 62.1. We should update to the latest stable > version 64.2. > http://site.icu-project.org/home > > > > Commits: > - b56b720e: 8218640: Update ICU4C to version 64.2 > > Changes:

Re: RFR: 8211308: Support HTTP/2 in WebView

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:18:38 GMT, Arunprasad Rajkumar wrote: > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 06:07:14 GMT, Arunprasad Rajkumar > wrote: > >> The goal of this enhancement is to use new [HttpClient >> APIs](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/11/docs/api/java.net.http/java/net/http/HttpClient.html)

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8226754: FX build fails using gradle 5.6+ or 6

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 13:54:22 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > JBS issue: [JDK-8226754](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226754) > > As noted in the JBS bug, the JavaFX build fails with gradle 6 (as well as not > building correctly with 5.6 or later). > > The existing JavaFX build uses

Re: [Rev 01] RFR: 8226754: FX build fails using gradle 5.6+ or 6

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 17:16:10 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > The pull request has been updated with additional changes. > > > > Added commits: > - a928b41f: Revert ivy layout pattern changes per review comments > > Changes: > - all:

Re: RFR: 8231870: CrossLibs script for armv6hf toolchain download fails

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:17:39 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:10:28 GMT, Johan Vos wrote: > >> On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 15:18:58 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 07:43:43 GMT, Dell Green >>> <12861109+de

Re: RFR: 8231870: Updated armv6hf crosslibs script with new domains

11:59:52 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 11:58:43 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 08:41:40 GMT, Johan Vos wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 19:58:20 GMT, Dell Green

Re: RFR: 8226754: FX build fails using gradle 5.6+ or 6

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:24:29 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 07:50:44 GMT, Johan Vos wrote: > >> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 13:54:22 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> >>> JBS issue: [JDK-8226754](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226754) >&

Re: RFR: 8226754: FX build fails using gradle 5.6+ or 6

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 13:54:22 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > JBS issue: [JDK-8226754](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226754) > > As noted in the JBS bug, the JavaFX build fails with gradle 6 (as well as not > building correctly with 5.6 or later). > > The existing JavaFX build uses

Re: [Approved] RFR: 8231870: Updated armv6hf crosslibs script with new domains

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 13:35:51 GMT, Dell Green <12861109+dellgr...@users.noreply.github.com> wrote: > buildSrc/crosslibs-armv6hf.sh pulls down debian and raspbian packages to be > able to cross compile javafx for arm hard float. Up to now the upstream > distribution versions have been debian and

Re: RFR: 8231870: Updated armv6hf crosslibs script with new domains

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 19:58:20 GMT, Dell Green <12861109+dellgr...@users.noreply.github.com> wrote: > On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 17:42:21 GMT, Kenzie Togami > <2093023+kenziero...@users.noreply.github.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 17:30:11 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 7 Oct 2019

JavaFX 14-ea+1 available

Hi, The first EA build for JavaFX 14 is available now from https://gluonhq.com/products/javafx/#ea and from maven central. In the past, I noticed EA-builds are downloaded often, and that's a great thing. I think that without the JavaFX 13 EA-builds and the feedback, the native buffering feature

RFR: [JDK-8230775] Release Notes for JavaFX 13

Hi Kevin, Please review https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/587 which has the release notes for JavaFX 13 and thus fixes https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/586 or https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8230775 Thanks, - Johan

RFR: JDK-8229482 : typo in release notes link

Please review the (trivial) webrev for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8229482 Thanks, - Johan (since it is in the 12-dev repository, I want to push this to openjdk.net first and then sync to the jfx-12 branch on github)

request to backport JDK-8209967 to jfx-11

Hi Kevin, I request permission to backport the following issue to 11-dev: JDK-8209967 Bump minimum gradle version to 4.8 for JDK 11 Thanks, - Johan

RFR: [JDK-8229418] Set release version to 11.0.4

Hi Kevin, Please review https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8229418 which bumps the version in the 11-dev tree. Thanks, - Johan

RFR: JDK-8228766: Platform.startup() deadlock on mac

Hi, Please review PR #543 [1] which fixes issue #542 [2] or JDK-8228766 [3]. Thanks, - Johan [1] https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/543 [2] https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/542 [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228766

Platform dependent behavior in Platform.startup()

Hi, A pattern I increasingly use is to add JavaFX functionality to existing non-JavaFX applications. Rather than adding a class that extends javafx.application.Application, I add some code to an existing class, like this: javafx.platform.Platform.startup(() -> {System.err.println("JavaFX

RFR: JDK-8228424: release notes for 12.0.2

Hi Kevin, Please review https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228424 with webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8228424/webrev.00/ which contains release notes for 12.0.2 Thanks, - Johan

RFR: JDK-8222839 : increase security version for 12-dev

Hi Kevin, Please review https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228422 with webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8228422/webrev.00/ which increases the security version in the 12-dev repository. Thanks, - Johan

New preview release for shared buffer PR

Hi, A new early access release containing the code in PR 472 is now available (see links below). (https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/472) This EA release takes into account all discussions on the PR so far. It would be great to have this in JavaFX 13, and therefore it is very

[RFR] JDK-8223760: allow to build static libs

Hi Kevin, Please review the following PR: JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223760 https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/470 Thanks, - Johan

Re: CFV: New OpenJFX Committer: Nir Lisker

Vote: YES On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:55 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > I hereby nominate Nir Lisker [1] to OpenJFX Committer. > > Nir is an OpenJFX community member, who has contributed 16 changesets > [2][3] to OpenJFX. > > Votes are due by July 13, 2019. > > Only current OpenJFX Committers [4]

RFR: JDK-8226234: Simplify iOS properties

Hi, Please review PR #501 https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/501 which fixes #500 https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/500 or https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8226234 This is a change that should not affect non-ios platforms. Thanks, - Johan

Previews for shared buffer PR

The PR discussed in https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/472, addressing https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8167148 provides a very much wanted feature. It is important that things are done in the right way so that the code can be maintained in the long-term future. Therefore,

RFR: 8222839: release notes for 12.0.1

Hi Kevin, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8222839/webrev.00/ which fixes https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222839 thanks, - Johan

RFR: JDK-8222804: increase security version in jfx-12

Hi Kevin, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8222804/webrev.00/ which fixes https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222804 Thanks, - Johan

Backport request for jfx-12

Hi Kevin, I ask permission to backport the following issues to jfx-12: 8219539: Cherry pick GTK WebKit 2.22.6 changes 8214808: Better framerate computation - Johan

Re: [13] RFR: Request to sync April 2019 CPU changes into jfx-dev

+1 On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 6:02 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Johan and Phil, > > I request approval to sync changes from to the just-released April 2019 > CPU release into jfx-dev. Here is the aggregate webrev for the fixes: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/cpu-1904-sync/jfx-dev/webrev/ > >

Re: [11] RFR: Request to backport April 2019 CPU changes into 11-dev

+1 On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 6:02 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Hi Johan, > > I request approval to backport the changes from the just-released April > 2019 CPU to 11-dev. > > 1. Webrev for Apr 2019 CPU changes > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/cpu-1904-sync/11-dev/webrev/ > > This is a

backport of JDK-8221702

Hi Kevin, I ask permission to backport the following issue to jfx-11: JDK-8221702: Use HTTPS to download all build dependencies. - Johan

Re: [13] RFR: JDK-8221702: Use HTTPS to download all build dependencies

+1 On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 3:22 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Please review the following simple fix to fix the one place in > build.gradle where we mistakenly use "http" rather than "https" to > download build-time artifacts. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8221702 >

Review Request: JDK-8222066: Change JavaFX release version to 11.0.3 in 11-dev

Hi Kevin, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8222066/webrev.00/ which fixes https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8222066 - Johan

11-backports

Hi Kevin, I ask permission to backport the following issues to 11-dev: JDK-8209457 : [WebView] Canvas.toDataURL with image/jpeg MIME type fails JDK-8213541 : WebView does not handle HTTP response without ContentType JDK-8211307 : Add prefix to build tools paths JDK-8207772 : File API and

Re: Update openjfx.io to JavFX12?

Yes, this should be 12 indeed. It's on our todo-list, but if you or anyone else want to update it, you can create a PR at https://github.com/openjfx/openjfx.github.io While this site is initiated by Gluon, I want to stress that openjfx.io really is a community website, hence I highly encourage

Accelerator in System MenuBar

Related to https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/370: The issue appears on Mac, with a system menubar. When the scene contains e.g. a TextField (which has a CMD-V keymapping), and a menuitem has been assigned a CMD-V accelerator, the latter should not be invoked when the action is

properties for Prism and Glass

Both Prism and Glass provide a top-level API and rely on specific implementations. On desktop, the specific implementations do not require properties to be set, as the defaults are obtained from properties like " os.name" etc. However, they can be overruled. On embedded, it is more likely that

Re: How are library developers supposed to specify JavaFX dependencies (on JFX/JDK >= 11)?

Hi Michael, You have to make a clear distinction between modules and jars. Libraries should be one or more modules, and their dependencies should be declared in a module-info.java There are no platform-dependent modules in JavaFX. If your library depends on javafx.graphics, you declare that in

external mousewheel slow scrolling

Hi Phil, The fix for JDK-8183399 [1] introduced a new issue: if an external mouse with a real mousewheel is used for scrolling, the new scrollvalues are a factor 10 too low. I created a new bug for this (JDK-8218424) [2] and Jose created a PR to fix this [3]. I'll review that PR shortly. Can you

mvn exec:java

While looking into https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/316 (crash in webkit when using maven), it became clear that the default way of starting java applications in maven is not really the recommended way (supplying module path and modules). However, mvn exec:java is very widely

Review request for [JDK-8217259] release notes 11.0.2

Hi Kevin, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8217259/webrev.00/ which contains the release notes for 11.0.2 A layouted version of this is also available at https://github.com/johanvos/openjdk-jfx/blob/jfx-11/doc-files/release-notes-11.0.2.md Thanks, - Johan

Re: [11] RFR: Request to backport January 2019 CPU changes into 11-dev

Approved On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 7:13 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Hi Johan, > > I request approval to backport the changes from the just-released > January 2019 CPU, along with two changesets to update libjpeg to version > 9c (I discovered that I forgot to include them on the earlier list of >

Re: [12] RFR: Request to sync January 2019 CPU changes into jfx-dev

Approved. On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 7:12 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Johan and Phil, > > I request approval to sync changes from to the just-released January > 2019 CPU release into jfx-dev. Here is the aggregate webrev for the fixes: > >

Request approval to backport 8207159: update ICU to 62.1

Hi Kevin, I request approval to backport JBS-8207159 to 11-dev (targeting 11.0.2): JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8207159 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/20a8447c71c6 The changeset patch applies

RFR backport of 8210411

Hi Kevin, Pankaj, Please review the 11-backport for 8210411 (JavaFX crash with Wayland): http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8210411/webrev.00/ Thanks, - Johan

Re: Javapackager 10 to bundle OpenJDK 11 runtime

ernatively, Gluon has a standalone > version of javapackager that will work with JDK 11. Johan Vos can > provide a pointer. > > -- Kevin > > [1] https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/343 > [2] http://jdk.java.net/jpackage/ > [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/core-libs-dev >

inconsistent class lookup in native code

I noticed the behavior in the native-glass code for calling back in the Java layer differs fundamentally between linux and mac. On Linux, the JNI_OnLoad call will initialize the required classes/methods/fields for calling back into Java, and class lookup is done as follows: clazz =

Re: OpenJFX JMOD Files

Hi Scott, I got the use case. I think it should be possible, although in general uploading to the OSS sonatype repository requires uploading jars for the classes, sources and javadoc. There is no procedure yet (afaik) for uploading mods, but we can see if that works. - Johan On Fri, Dec 7, 2018

12-ea builds

Hi, We uploaded JavaFX 12-ea+3 yesterday at https://gluonhq.com/products/javafx/#ea and the artifacts are in maven central. (see https://twitter.com/GluonHQ/status/1068456348097134592) >From now on, our intention is to tag the dev repository every thursday with an incremental build number

Review Request: make caching of native libs more robust

An easy to reproduce issue is to change permissions on the cache dir used by Javafx for storing native libs. If JavaFX can't write anymore to that cache dir, applications will fail since all pipelines use native code. The fix at https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/300 makes the

Re: Review request: Long scrolling on mac [JDK-8183399]

webrev at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8183399/webrev.00/ On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 7:03 PM Johan Vos wrote: > Please review the fix for issue > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8183399 ( > https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/38) which should be > fixed

Re: Building a 32-bit JavaFX lib

We have an internal build for JavaFX 11 on win32 as there were some customers asking for it. It seems demand for this is bigger than I expected, so it might make sense we add win32 to the supported list. There is not much different in building win32 builds, you have to specify IS_64 is false

Review request: Long scrolling on mac [JDK-8183399]

Please review the fix for issue https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8183399 ( https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/issues/38) which should be fixed with PR #274 (https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/274) It only affects mac builds. - Johan

Re: [11] Request approval to backport 8211304: [macOS] Crash on focus loss from dialog on macOS 10.14 Mojave

+1 for this backport. On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:15 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Hi Johan, > > I request approval to backport the following critical bug to 11-dev (for > 11.0.2). > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211304 > Changeset:

release notes for JavaFX 11.0.1

The 11.0.1 tag is added to the 11-dev repository, and the artifacts has been built. I created a JBS issue [1] and webrev [2] for the release notes. [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213417 [2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8213417/webrev.00/ - Johan

Re: JavaFX 11.0.1-ea+1 release

time.version: 11.0.1+13 > java.class.version: 55.0 > java.version: 11.0.1 > javafx.version: 11 > > Shouldn't "javafx.version" follow the same naming conventions as used by > "java.version"? > > > Am 02.11.18 um 09:59 schrieb Johan Vos: > > Hi, &g

Re: Problems building openjfx

Hi Michael, What environment do you use to run that Windows build script? The windows builds are the ones I still feel least comfortable about. We tried to automate those on AdoptOpenJDK infrastructure, but they are using Ansible for provisioning machines (for very good reasons), and we spent

Re: JavaFX 11.0.1-ea+1 release

small scaling factors >> >> -- Kevin >> >> >> On 11/2/2018 3:52 AM, Laurent Bourgès wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Could you publish the list of included bug fixed (JBS query) ? >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Laurent >>

JavaFX 11.0.1-ea+1 release

Hi, We are about to release JavaFX 11.0.1, containing the fixes that made it into the 11-dev repository. An early-access build for this is available as SDK/jmods at http://download2.gluonhq.com/openjfx/11.0.1/openjfx-11.0.1-ea+1_linux-x64_bin-jmods.zip

Re: Problems building openjfx

On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 7:34 PM Nir Lisker wrote: > I think we should focus on 11 on the wiki, so it's really good you have >> instructions for 8 on your site. But the 11 instructions on the wiki >> should >> be working for everyone who wants to build 11. > > > There are instructions for 8 on

Re: Problems building openjfx

Your site says these are for 8, but I assume it is very similar to 11? If so, we should probably update the wiki with the instructions on your site. Are there any particular parts of the wiki where you think corrections are needed? I think we should focus on 11 on the wiki, so it's really good you

Re: JDK-8090930: Add Support for Extended Mouse Buttons

Hi Michael, I only started to look into this now, sorry for being late at the party. Overall, this looks good to me. The risk is indeed minimal (developers relying on switch-default cases to select e.g. middle button will be punished). I am not entirely sure about the naming though. Should it

Re: Review request backport 8210386

m the webrev: > > tests/system/src/test/java/test/com/sun/marlin/ScaleClipTest.java > > The rest looks OK. > > -- Kevin > > > On 10/29/2018 9:39 AM, Johan Vos wrote: > > Hi Kevin, > > > > Please review the backport of 8210386 (Marlin fixes) into 11-dev

Review request backport 8210386

Hi Kevin, Please review the backport of 8210386 (Marlin fixes) into 11-dev (target 11.0.1) http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvos/8210386/webrev.00/ - Johan

Re: Running JavaFX-11 applications from within Eclipse fails

gi?id=540247 > > Tom > > On 21.10.18 19:45, Johan Vos wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > Nice workaround, but what do you think needs to be done to fix it? Can > > the java.library.path somehow be changed in a plugin or so? > > Renaming the native libraries in JavaFX w

Re: Running JavaFX-11 applications from within Eclipse fails

Hi Tom, Nice workaround, but what do you think needs to be done to fix it? Can the java.library.path somehow be changed in a plugin or so? Renaming the native libraries in JavaFX would probably solve this, but that seems the wrong solution to me. - Johan On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 3:39 PM Tom

Re: [11-dev] RFR: Request to sync October 2018 CPU changes into FX 11-dev

+1 On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 7:24 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > By way of background, Johan and I have decided to use the existing > 11-dev repo to accumulated fixes for 11.x update releases. Fixes will > need approval by either Johan or myself. We will send out the guidelines > for approval to get

Re: [12] RFR: Request to sync October 2018 CPU changes into jfx-dev

+1 On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 6:39 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Johan and Phil, > > I request approval to sync changes from to the just-released October > 2018 CPU release into jfx-dev. Here is the aggregate webrev for the fixes: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/cpu-1810-sync/jfx-dev/webrev/ > >

Re: Error: JavaFX runtime components are missing, and are required to run this application

The Java launcher (in the Java 11 JDK) checks if your main class extends Application, and in that case it checks the module path and tries to find javafx.graphics module. If you have that module on the classpath, but not as a module, the launcher will exit with the message you see. There are some

Re: [8u-backport] JDK-8087516 : [JavaFX] Conditional support for GTK 3 on Linux

t/browse/JDK-8212106. > > Can you please try now to build on 18.04 LTS ? It should pass. > > Regards, > Pankaj > > -Original Message- > From: Kevin Rushforth > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2018 9:17 PM > To: Johan Vos; Pankaj Bansal > Cc: openjfx-dev@openjdk.java

Re: [8u-backport] JDK-8087516 : [JavaFX] Conditional support for GTK 3 on Linux

Hi Pankaj, What gcc version did you use to build on Ubuntu 18.04? Default, I think gcc 7.3 is used in 18.04 and that has the issue with wait() in modules/fxpackager/src/main/native/library/common/PosixPlatform.cpp (which was later replaced with wait(); ) This is blocking me to build 8u-dev on

Re: [8u-backport] JDK-8087516 : [JavaFX] Conditional support for GTK 3 on Linux

I will test on Ubuntu 18.04 and 16.04 tomorrow. On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 10:05 PM Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Looks good. I have done full testing with both GTK 2 and GTK 3 on Ubuntu > 16.04 with a sanity check on Oracle Linux. > > +1 (note that you will need a second reviewer) > > As a reminder of

Re: JavaFX 11 on Android

droid an iOS, what is available > instead? jul or a native logger? > We use java.util.logging for now. > > - Nir > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:01 PM Johan Vos wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I worked from the openjfx/develop repository and created a version that >> wor

Re: JavaFX 11 on Android

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:10 PM Sverre Moe wrote: > Den tor. 4. okt. 2018 kl. 19:01 skrev Johan Vos : > >> Hi, >> >> I worked from the openjfx/develop repository and created a version that >> works on Android (will work on iOS soon). >> This required s

JavaFX 11 on Android

Hi, I worked from the openjfx/develop repository and created a version that works on Android (will work on iOS soon). This required some changes, as we're running on top of the Android VM, which is not really Java (not even close). The longer-term goal is to run a JVM on Android as well, but that

Mailinglist for JavaFX discussions

Hi, A new mailinglist related to JavaFX has been created: openjfx-disc...@openjdk.java.net (manage subscriptions via the listinfo [1]) See [2] for the welcome mail on that list. You're all invited to join the new mailinglist, and discuss this (the purpose of the list itself) on that list

Re: [12] RFR : JDK-8203884 : Update libjpeg to version 9c

Unrelated to the patch, I wonder if there is a better way to include this functionality. If we bundle an application that uses JavaFX but also includes a native library that links with libjpeg, there will be issues due to duplicate symbols (this happens for example when running deeplearning4j on

Re: State of maven artifacts

26, 2018, at 6:19 AM, Michael Ennen > <mailto:mike.en...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > And just to reiterate and confirm for anyone trying to get a handle > on > > using > > > > the Maven artifacts - it is *NOT* necessary to manually specify the &g

Re: Later OpenJFX Compatibilty with JDK 11 LTS

> > How can we continue to upgrade to newer OpenJFX as time goes by. Will the > later OpenJFX 13+ work with JDK 11 or is it just "FX N run JDK N-1" (one > version backward support)? > There is a separate thread about this:

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >