For me, that means my IDE (IDEA) thinks all the JavaFX libraries are available while my build tool (Gradle) thinks the opposite. IntelliJ IDEA appears to add 'lib/*.jar' to the classpath when I register a new JDK. I'm also curious how most IDEs are going to handle jfxrt.jar now. If using the included ANT tooling is a requirement, things get much more difficult. I could start using JavaFX with almost no effort. For me, a simple switch like "-XX:+EnableJavaFX" would be much better since my current build tool (Gradle) and deployment tools (ex: Install4J) would 'just work' with trivial modification. IMHO it's not wise to assume everyone wants to use the included ANT tooling. Having jfxrt.jar bundled, but not on the classpath makes it even more difficult to use JavaFX with existing build and deployment tools than it used to be. At the time I decided I'd wait until JavaFX got co-bundled (properly) before trying again. I'm not actually using JavaFX for anything yet, but, the last time I tested it, the build / packaging strategy I came up with was basically the same as swpalmer. I was hoping for something simple like "-XX:+EnableJavaFX to have the included JavaFX put on the bootclasspath automatically.I'll second that if it's something that's possible. I should stress that if the reason for not including the JavaFx classes by default was to avoid breaking stuff, it's clearly already broken because the native libraries embedded in the JRE are loaded ahead of what is in folders specified via, leading to the mismatch mentioned above for apps that were working prior to 7u6. I was hoping for something simple like "-XX:+EnableJavaFX to have the included JavaFX put on the bootclasspath automatically. It's unclear to me what the toolkit="swing" really means. Many of the systems the app will run on will not be connected to the Internet. Web Start may be used for some other cases, but this is generally not an application that will use Web Start. The application will be installed via installer or simple unzipping depending on the platform. (I can require 7u6 minimum on Linux and Mac and can bundle a private JRE on Windows.)Īll of the options you have listed involves significant changes to the launching infrastructure of the application. I was hoping that with 7u6 I can avoid packaging JavaFX separately. When I run this configuration (using the JavaFX 2.1 jars that I package with the app) it will fail with 7u6 because even though my JavaFX 2.1 jars are used, the native libraries are picked up from the 7u6 install and there is a mismatch between the Java and native code! I installed the JavaFX jars and native libraries in the applications folder and added the native library folder to the. Up to now I have taken the jars and Native libraries from the JavaFX zips and made my own Maven artifacts for them, for each platform. It is configured to build for Windows, Linux, and OS X. A primary UI component of this app is implemented in JavaFX using a JFXPanel. I have an existing Swing-based application, built with Maven (this may change to Gradle, but isn't likely to see Ant again). Thanks for that information, but none of it looks like what I need. 1.7K Training / Learning / Certification.165.3K Java EE (Java Enterprise Edition).7.9K Oracle Database Express Edition (XE).3.8K Java and JavaScript in the Database.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |