ByteCode.News
Submit RSS Atom Sign in

Back to the channels

#java

  1. raj which jdk is most lightweight
  2. Para Why would one care.
  3. raj Less space
  4. raj Oracle jdk consumes > 300 MB
  5. Para Again, why would one care.
  6. Para What's your actual usecase/need here?
  7. raj To consume less diskspace
  8. Para The USB stick right in front of me has 64GB capacity.
  9. Para My phone has 24.
  10. dreamreal Are you on a constrained system?
  11. raj Yes
  12. raj Why cant i just get a small jdk
  13. dreamreal I mean, I doubt anyone's measured a whole lot, because it's not usually relevant: what JVM version are you targeting, and on what platform, and are you doing development on this system
  14. dreamreal well, the JDK has a definition and it's pretty encompassing, is why
  15. dreamreal a "small JDK" isn't likely to be an actual JDK
  16. raj I m fine with java 8 or above
  17. dreamreal now, if you want a small RUNTIME image, that's very doable
  18. Para Profiles were a thing but not really anymore.
  19. raj No i want small jdk
  20. Para What are you trying to put this jdk into?
  21. dreamreal well, I've asked what information I'd need, and you've not bothered to answer, so we good. Good luck out there!
  22. raj Linux platform
  23. raj Java 8 or above
  24. raj Preferably less than 50 MB jdk i want
  25. Para And I want to win the lottery.
  26. * dreamreal notes the lack of platform, and at less than 50MB, you're not going to get it
  27. raj I did say linux platform
  28. dreamreal but you left off which processor
  29. dreamreal which is kinda important
  30. dreamreal but less than 50MB, well, sorry
  31. Para And what HDD/SSD/mass storage.
  32. dreamreal just the way itis
  33. Para And if this is some portable thing meant to be hanged from a pole in the Arctic or just cheap system under the table.
  34. dreamreal what you want does not exist
  35. dreamreal even if you were running it on a raspberry pi, what you want does not exist
  36. raj Ok
  37. dreamreal THEORETICALLY something like it could exist, but nobody is going to put in the work to create and validate it, and even then I'm not sure you'd get it to that size
  38. Para 88 megs seems to be the bitnami minimal docker image for jdk, and I'd imagine they've ran the thing through the shredder.
  39. dreamreal JVM or JDK?
  40. Para judge yourself, probably missing all non-essentials https://hub.docker.com/r/bitnami/java-min
  41. javabot Para's title: "bitnami/java-min - Docker Image"
  42. dreamreal hmm, the docker-compose isn't available for that one
  43. Para I think those superoptimized images are done in a way which doesn't really even produce layers.
  44. cheeser dmlloyd: https://github.com/MorphiaOrg/morphia/issues/4273
  45. javabot cheeser's title: "Replace ASM + Gizmo with the Java Class File API (backport) · Issue #4273 · MorphiaOrg/morphia · GitHub"
  46. nevet Replace ASM + Gizmo with the Java Class File API (backport) · Issue #4273 · MorphiaOrg/morphia
  47. dmlloyd nice
  48. cheeser i haven't had a chance to test this theory yet but I know javac will fail if you try to use package java.* but can you edit the classfile and change that package to java.whatever postcompilation the way, say, shading rewrites the packages?
  49. cheeser i.e., can the validator tell you've doctored the classfile to coerce that package name?