undefined | Better HN

0 pointsDarkmSparks4y ago0 comments

If you are distributing software based on java a 40mb jre in place of a 400mb jdk is surely preferred. You can build them yourself for each OS you target with jlink, or you can just grab the latest built and tested one from e.g. Bellsoft - but not Adoptium or Oracle.

Java has been "breaking changes" between releases to make python blush for a few years now, 17 finally looks like a worthy migration from 8.

0 comments

krzyk4y ago

JRE is like 44MB, JDK is 190MB. Difference is not 400 MB. And you get jshell, javac all the nice tools that I missed when some wise guys in distro or corp decided JRE is enough.

DarkmSparksOP4y ago

not when extracted they arent. And jlink wont help you get a jdk for 32bit arm

krzyk4y ago

Extraced:

    323M    jdk

    136M    jre

Still, not 400 MB difference.

If you want jdk you don't use jlink.

DarkmSparksOP4y ago

>Still, not 400 MB difference.

didn't say it was? A java.base jre is about 40mb extracted jdks extract to about 400mb (depending on os/arch)

A downloaded then extracted jdk will take over 500mb of disk space

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

krzyk4y ago

JRE is like 44MB, JDK is 190MB. Difference is not 400 MB. And you get jshell, javac all the nice tools that I missed when some wise guys in distro or corp decided JRE is enough.

DarkmSparksOP4y ago

not when extracted they arent. And jlink wont help you get a jdk for 32bit arm

krzyk4y ago

Extraced:

    323M    jdk

    136M    jre

Still, not 400 MB difference.

If you want jdk you don't use jlink.

DarkmSparksOP4y ago

>Still, not 400 MB difference.

didn't say it was? A java.base jre is about 40mb extracted jdks extract to about 400mb (depending on os/arch)

A downloaded then extracted jdk will take over 500mb of disk space

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse