On 27/11/2018 14:08, Eduardo Quintanilla wrote: > A follow up question. When the option "Use default" is selected in the > Tomcatw manager. Where is that value configured? I assumed it was JAVA_HOME.
It is the default Java version configured in the registry. From memory (it is a long time since I looked at this so I might have misremembered / Oracle might have changed how it works) there is a Java plug-in that gets added to the control panel that lets you select the default version from among the installed versions. Mark > > Eduardo Quintanilla > Software Developer > Block Networks > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> > Sent: martes, 27 de noviembre de 2018 4:23 a. m. > To: users@tomcat.apache.org > Subject: Re: [slightly OT] Re: Tomcat 9 does not work with Java 11 > > On 27/11/2018 08:47, André Warnier (tomcat) wrote: >> On 27.11.2018 01:49, Christopher Schultz wrote: > > <snip/> > >>> Hmm... just realized that the service.bat file might not be included >>> in the "installer" bundle. You might have to grab the ZIP bundle from >>> the Tomcat downloads site to get those scripts. >>> >>> - -chris >> >> This may be the right moment to suggest that this (these ?) ZIP >> bundle(s) could be included by default, when running the installer >> (not unpacked, just copied along and dropped somewhere). For as long >> as I can remember (which is getting somewhat shorter these days, but >> still goes back to tomcat 4.x), this has been an issue which regularly >> crops up with the Windows versions : whenever something goes wrong, >> people are being referred to files that they do not have, and it >> always takes a while to explain, download etc.. >> It would be easier if the files were already there anyway. >> In the past, there may have been a concern for the extra size of the >> download (nowadays about 11 MB for each 32/64 bit version), but >> compared to many other downloads nowadays, this is still quite reasonable. >> (And in fact, there are many common files, so not everything would >> have to be downloaded. Also the 32-bit version is less useful these >> days.) > > https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56323 > > It wasn't back-ported to 7.0.x. I'm not aware of of causing issues in 8.5.x > or 9.0.x so it could be back-ported. > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
