ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jaikiran Pai <>
Subject Re: AW: Java 11 Compatibility Problem
Date Wed, 10 Oct 2018 12:04:15 GMT
Hi Jan,

For end users (of Ivy), the place where pack200 packaging becomes
visible is when they reference it in their dependencies as noted in our
doc[1]. So IMO, I think we should probably add a note/warning within our
documentation than a runtime log/warn message. But I still think, it's a
bit too early to do that. Maybe we should wait a few more releases of
Java and see if any alternatives show up?


On 10/10/18 11:09 AM, Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote:
> If I understand Dragans point right, the warning comes when analyzing the code.
> Not just running Ivy.
> So the normal user won't see the warning. Maybe we should implement a warning?
> Jan
>> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Jaikiran Pai []
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018 07:08
>> An:
>> Betreff: Re: Java 11 Compatibility Problem
>> I agree with Stefan, at the moment I recommend ignoring those warnings.
>> There isn't anything else we can do (other than removing support for
>> pack200, which isn't a good option).
>> -Jaikiran
>> On 10/10/18 9:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>> Hi Krzysztof
>>> I'm not actively working on Ivy so take my response with a grain of
>>> salt.
>>> On 2018-10-09, Dragan, Krzysztof wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> scanning latest version of Apache Ivy(2.5.0-rc-1) using jdeprscan on
>>>> jdk11 I noticed two problems with this jar.
>>>> These two methods using internal jdk marked for removal and will be
>> deleted:
>>>>   * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>>>>     java/util/jar/Pack200$Unpacker (forRemoval=true)
>>>>   * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>>>>     java/util/jar/Pack200 (forRemoval=true)
>>> For background see
>>> The Java community has decided to eventually remove support for the
>>> pack200 format, but it still is there in Java11. Right now this is
>>> only a warning, it will only become a real problem once the classes
>>> actually get removed. They do not offer any alternative
>> implementation
>>> right now, and may never do (unlike the JAXB case, which is available
>>> as an external library now).
>>> I am aware of an alternative based on the former Apache Harmony code
>>> in but am unsure about its
>> state
>>> - both technically and legally - I very vaguely recall the Pack200
>>> spec was encumbered with Oracle patents but may be totally wrong.
>>> In Ivy's case the only save option right now was to remove support
>> for
>>> pack200 archives and break existing setups that consume such archives
>>> which seems to be excessive just in order to get rid of a warning.
>>> If yu ask me I'd recommend to live with the warning for now and wait
>>> for an alternative to the class library's pack200 classes to become
>>> available - which hopefully happens before the Java version removing
>>> support gets released.
>>> Stefan
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional
>>> commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional
>> commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message