4 ms·

> You can compile your Java code into an executable which doesn't require Java to be present. Wasn't this feature already supported in JDK 14 with the jpackage

> You can compile your Java code into an executable which doesn't require Java to be present. Wasn't this feature already supported in JDK 14 with the jpackage tool? https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/343 https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/343

nsonha 6y ago
I believe because dead code elimination isn't currently possible with JVM, "package to binary" would mean including the whole (or most of) JVM with your program.
vbsteven 6y ago
If I understand correctly, the difference between jpackage and GraalVM is this: Jpackage bundles a small Java VM (with only the features you use) together with your compiled bytecode into a single executable. When it runs it starts up the VM and executes bytecode on that VM exactly the same as it would be if you were to run a jar on a preexisting JDK/JRE installation. Graal compiles your full app ahead of time into a native code binary. There is no bytecode/translation happening at runtime. That is why GraalVM advertises faster startup and lower memory footprint. So there are essentially 3 ways to run JVM (Java/Scala/Kotlin/...) code: * compile into bytecode jar -> requires existing VM runtime * compile into bytecode jar + bundle VM runtime -> no dependencies required, runs as the previous option * compile into native binary -> no dependencies required, runs native, starts and runs faster
- bmc7505 6y ago
  Makes sense, thanks for clarifying!
- vips7L 6y ago
  > Jpackage bundles a small Java VM (with only the features you use) together with your compiled bytecode into a single executable. When it runs it starts up the VM and executes bytecode on that VM exactly the same as it would be if you were to run a jar on a preexisting JDK/JRE installation. This is incorrect. Jpackage creates an installer which will unpack the VM image and any other resources. I've tried it with a small CLI tool and it actually doesn't work that well (at least on Windows).
brabel 6y ago
It's actually jlink that is already available and creates a minimal JVM with your application code that you can distribute as OS-specific bundles... jpackage, which is still in beta (and doesn't work very well, I've tried it recently), will take the output of jlink and turn that into some common OS-specific packages, like RPM, Debian and dmg.
- vips7L 6y ago
  > and doesn't work very well, I've tried it recently) This is my experience as well. After installation, my installed app just didn't do anything.

nsonha 6y ago

I believe because dead code elimination isn't currently possible with JVM, "package to binary" would mean including the whole (or most of) JVM with your program.

vbsteven 6y ago

If I understand correctly, the difference between jpackage and GraalVM is this: Jpackage bundles a small Java VM (with only the features you use) together with your compiled bytecode into a single executable. When it runs it starts up the VM and executes bytecode on that VM exactly the same as it would be if you were to run a jar on a preexisting JDK/JRE installation. Graal compiles your full app ahead of time into a native code binary. There is no bytecode/translation happening at runtime. That is why GraalVM advertises faster startup and lower memory footprint. So there are essentially 3 ways to run JVM (Java/Scala/Kotlin/...) code: * compile into bytecode jar -> requires existing VM runtime * compile into bytecode jar + bundle VM runtime -> no dependencies required, runs as the previous option * compile into native binary -> no dependencies required, runs native, starts and runs faster

bmc7505 6y ago
Makes sense, thanks for clarifying!
vips7L 6y ago
> Jpackage bundles a small Java VM (with only the features you use) together with your compiled bytecode into a single executable. When it runs it starts up the VM and executes bytecode on that VM exactly the same as it would be if you were to run a jar on a preexisting JDK/JRE installation. This is incorrect. Jpackage creates an installer which will unpack the VM image and any other resources. I've tried it with a small CLI tool and it actually doesn't work that well (at least on Windows).

brabel 6y ago

It's actually jlink that is already available and creates a minimal JVM with your application code that you can distribute as OS-specific bundles... jpackage, which is still in beta (and doesn't work very well, I've tried it recently), will take the output of jlink and turn that into some common OS-specific packages, like RPM, Debian and dmg.

vips7L 6y ago
> and doesn't work very well, I've tried it recently) This is my experience as well. After installation, my installed app just didn't do anything.