CentOS - May 2019 - 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!

-- 
---- Fred Smith -- fredex at fcshome.stoneham.ma.us ----------------------------
                    Do you not know? Have you not heard? 
    The LORD is the everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth. 
  He will not grow tired or weary, and his understanding no one can fathom.
----------------------------- Isaiah 40:28 (niv) -----------------------------

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

https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3299701

You can always use Oracles Java if you wish.

Regards

Phil

-- 
*** Playing the game for the games sake. ***

IRC: kathenas
Twitter: kathenasorg
Website: https://kathenas.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20190513/02fa38a5/attachment-0002.sig>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Wyett <philwyett at kathenas.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 10:16 PM
> To: centos at centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS] JavaFX on C7 ?
> 
> On Sun, 2019-05-12 at 21:52 -0400, Fred Smith wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > I'm getting:
> >
> > Error: JavaFX runtime components are missing, and are required to run
> > this application
> >
<SNIP>
> 
> Hi,
> 
> https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3299701
> 
> You can always use Oracles Java if you wish.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Phil
<SNIP>

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] https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#FAQ
[2] confirmed by Fred Smith, when he opened this thread.
[3] https://github.com/atejeda/openjfx-el
[4] https://www.openh264.org/
[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.

--
Even when this disclaimer is not here:
I am not a contracting officer. I do not have authority to make or modify the
terms of any contract.