DevHeads.net

JavaFX on C7 ?

Hi all!

I'm getting:

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

for a certain Java app.

I'm hoping someone can tell me what bits and pieces I need to install
(and maybe where to find them) so I can satisfy that app's appetite
without screwing up my system.

Thanks in advance!

Fred

PS:

I see openjfx at openjfx.io. I assume that if this version is appropriate
for C7, that I need the one containing the jmods, not the SDK?

Again, clues will be much appreciated!

Comments

Re: JavaFX on C7 ?

By Phil Wyett at 05/12/2019 - 22:16

On Sun, 2019-05-12 at 21:52 -0400, Fred Smith wrote:
Hi,

<a href="https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3299701" title="https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3299701">https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3299701</a>

You can always use Oracles Java if you wish.

Regards

Phil

Re: JavaFX on C7 ?

By Denniston, Todd... at 05/13/2019 - 10:11

A somewhat more accessible answer is at [1], though it is a bit depressing:
"Does Red Hat's OpenJDK distribution included JavaFX?
No. Red Hat does not have plans to deliver JavaFX or the OpenJFX project in our distribution."

I thought JavaFX/openJFX was integrated into openjdk-11 (actually 9 according to the openjdk site), so I expected to see something along the lines of 'not in JDK8, but included standard with JDK11'. The above statement suggests they did not even build it into 11 on RHEL7 [2], and possibly not even on RHEL8. It might be interesting to know why... could it be a combo similar to [5] and not wanting to drop $2M/year on the MPEGLA cabal to do like Cisco[4]?

I have been told that getting javafx to build, on EL, is quite a bit of pain and thus have not tried it myself. Though I have been eyeing the work over at [3] wondering how much grief it would be to start with that, port it to 11 and try to use it with cisco's h264[4] instead of ffmpeg[5].

In the meantime, it looks like if we really need JFX, we will have to stoop down to the Oracle version and the maintenance fun that brings.

Hope this helps, and please let us know if you find a better or workable way[6] before we do.

[1] <a href="https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#FAQ" title="https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#FAQ">https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#FAQ</a>
[2] confirmed by Fred Smith, when he opened this thread.
[3] <a href="https://github.com/atejeda/openjfx-el" title="https://github.com/atejeda/openjfx-el">https://github.com/atejeda/openjfx-el</a>
[4] <a href="https://www.openh264.org/" title="https://www.openh264.org/">https://www.openh264.org/</a>
[5] I need it to work, but I need it unquestionably legal. I may disagree with Patents on math and logic, but they are legal in the country I work in, and thus must not be breached when working for its government. AFAIK some of the needed stuff in ffmpeg is still covered.
[6] besides ditching the javafx portions of the program, which is what I am truly considering.

Re: JavaFX on C7 ?

By fred smith at 05/13/2019 - 11:55

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 02:11:42PM +0000, Denniston, Todd A CIV USN NSWC CD CRANE ID (USA) wrote:
Do I conclude that you don't expect the openjfx bits to work in El7?

Fred

Re: JavaFX on C7 ?

By Denniston, Todd... at 06/01/2019 - 19:55

Actually I am expecting that it is worse than that... as in no openjfx bits *in* EL8 either[7].
I think that 'openjfx bits' would *work* in EL7 & EL8, it is just that we would have to go through the pain building and maintaining it ourselves. I would like to know why RH is not interested in supporting it. I would have expected that when fedora included it that there should not have been any patent/licensing restrictions showing up, so why is RH not including it?

[7] <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669672" title="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669672">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669672</a>