Editing Test Day:2018-09-26:java 8, 10 and 11 testday

{{Infobox_group
| name = java OpenJDK
| image = [[File:test-days-banner.svg|300px|link=QA/Test Days]]
| date = 2018-09-26
| time = all day
| website = [[QA/Test Days]]
| irc = [irc://irc.freenode.net/#fedora-test-day #fedora-test-day] ([http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=fedora-test-day webirc])
| irc = [irc://irc.freenode.net/#fedora-devel #fedora-devel] ([http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=fedora-devel webirc])
| fedora_mailing_list = test
}}

{{admon/note | Can't make the date? | If you come to this page before or after the test day is completed, your testing is still valuable, and you can use the information on this page to test, file any bugs you find at [http://bugzilla.redhat.com Bugzilla], and add your results to the results section. If this page is more than a month old when you arrive here, please check the [[QA/Test_Days|current schedule]] and see if a similar but more recent Test Day is planned or has already happened.}}

== What to test? ==

Today's instalment of Fedora Test Day will focus on [[Changes/java-11-openjdk-TechPreview | OpenJDK 11]] and [[Changes/java-openjdk-10| OpenJDK 10]]. Currently we have  [https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/java-1.8.0-openjdk/  java-1.8.0-openjdk] as main JDK in Fedora. It accompanied  java-1.7.0-openjdk  as JRE for a year, and replaced it in buildroot in '''F21'''. Similarly, as did java-1.7.0-openjdk to  java-1.6.0-openjdk in F16 as parallel JRE and replaced it in F17 in build root and main JDK.
However, today the situation is more complicated. Oracle changed release process, see   [[Changes/java-11-openjdk-TechPreview#Summary | OpenJDK 11 summary]] and [[Changes/java-openjdk-10#Summary| OpenJDK 10 summary]], so currently, in F27 and up, you have '''java-1.8.0-openjdk''' as main JDK, '''java-openjdk''' as rolling release of STS JDK 10, and '''java-11-openjdk''' as techpreview of future LTS JDK.  '''Javaws''' is provided in another package - '''icedtea-web'''
* Most crucial is, that JDK10 and JDK11, unlike JDK8, are modular, so  many java applications will cease to work. 
** This is not crucial part of the testing, but to have an matrix of most common failures would be interesting
Among other changes are
*  parallel installability
* switching of JRE/JDK
*  platform docs and sources
* config files in /etc
* system wide crypto policy

== Who's available ==

The following cast of characters will be available testing, workarounds, bug fixes, and general discussion. In case of problem related to test day organization/wiki/whatever, please reach out to sumantrom.
* CET: jvanek (jvanek at  redhat.com) + zzambers, mvala, pmikova, jerboaa
* EDT: stooke (stooke at redhat.com) + omajid, jkang

== Prerequisite for Test Day == 

* kind relationship to java
* basic knowledge of java and javac or rpms.
* basic knowledge of java's jigsaw (major change in jdk9) is advantage
* Root access on the system where testing is happening

=== Known issues ===
* '''[[https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200302 dnf reinstall is broken]]'''
* -debug or -slowdebug packages are not for reasonable use.  They are for people debugging JDK iself. This testcase is not covering them. Feel free to try to install them, and to switch them, also some apps should run in them (although terribly slowly) so if you face some issues with them, it is most likely not an issue.
* accessibility works only on java-1.8.0-openjdk
** even there it is known to have side effects and strange consequences
* recently was found broken icon at jdk8: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1626810

== How to test? ==
=== Applicationform ===

 http://testdays.fedorainfracloud.org/events/48

=== Basic cases ===
<pre>
sudo dnf install java
   # have it installed JRE you expected?
   # is java on path and working?
   # are java applications working?
   # do you miss something?
   # is content of /usr/lib/jvm sane?
   # is content of /etc/java  sane? (jdk8 got /etc/java support in f29)
   # are alternatives sane? (see lower)

sudo dnf install java-devel
   # have it installed JDK you expected?
   # is java  and javac on path and working?
   # do you miss something?
   # is content of /usr/lib/jvm sane?
   # is content of /etc/java  sane? (jdk8 got /etc/java support in f29)
   # are alternatives sane? (see lower)

sudo dnf install java-openjdk
   # have it installed JRE you expected?
   # is java on path and working?
   # are java applications working?
   # do you miss something?
   # similarly for java-openjdk-devel as  jwith ava-devel
   # is content of /usr/lib/jvm sane?
   # is content of /etc/java  sane? (jdk8 got /etc/java support in f29)
   # are alternatives sane? (see lower)

sudo dnf install java-11-openjdk
   # have it installed JRE you expected?
   # is java on path and working?
   # are java applications working?
   # do you miss something?
   # similarly for java-11-openjdk-devel as  jwith ava-devel
   # is content of /usr/lib/jvm sane?
   # is content of /etc/java  sane? (jdk8 got /etc/java support in f29)
   # are alternatives sane? (see lower)

sudo dnf install java-1.8.0-openjdk
   # have it installed JRE you expected?
   # is java on path and working?
   # are java applications working?
   # do you miss something?
   # similarly for java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel as  jwith ava-devel
   # is content of /usr/lib/jvm sane?
   # is content of /etc/java  sane? (jdk8 got /etc/java support in f29)
   # are alternatives sane? (see lower)

sudo dnf install java-9-openjdk
  # should install nothing on f29
  # if it does, it is a bug
  # should install on f28, but please donot

sudo dnf install icedtea-web
   # is javaws on path and working?
   # are alternatives sane? (see lower)

sudo dnf update $JDK
sudo dnf remove $JDK
   # is the system sane after upgrade/remove?
</pre>
=== Switching JRE/JDK  ===
* Multiple jdks are handled by alternatives
* Major  '''masters''' are:
* for SDK: ''javac, java_sdk_openjdk, java_sdk_$VERSION, java_sdk_$VERSION_openjdk''
* for JRE: ''java, jre_openjdk, jre_$VERSION, jre_$VERSION_openjdk''
** where version is one of  1.8.0, 10, 11
* for javadoc: ''javadocdir''
* or javadoc-zip: ''javadoczip''
* for icedtea-web: ''javaws''

<pre>
sudo alternatives --config  $MASTER
   # will select the tooling acocrding by masters from above
   # except programs on PATH, also direcotries in /usr/lib/jvm are shufled. Please observe!
alternatives --display $MASTER
   # will show current setup for given master

### headless JRE ###
   # if your application do not need X (GUI) operate with ...-headless subpackage  only in above examples
   # if you need javac,  operate with ...-devel subpackage  in above examples
   # if you need javadoc or sources,  operate with ...-src, -javadoc and javadoc-zip  subpackage   in above examples

########################################################
# There are *many*  jdk  packages and  countless  subpackages
########################################################
no | sudo dnf install "java*openjdk*"
dnf   search  "java*openjdk*" 
   # note for f28 -   jdk9 is no longer supported, and is there only because jdk10 was not alive in time of f28 release 
   # on f29 you should NOT see jdk9 appear

  # Please try to install and use various combinations. This is quite crucial part of this testday.
  # is the combination working and you can switch? 
  # can you switch installtaions
  # are slaves as expected?
  # is /etc/java affecting correct jdk and so on....

</pre>

=== System wide crypto policy  ===
Your java and javaws is affected by system crypto policy
<pre>
update-crypto-policies --show
   # will should you current

sudo  update-crypto-policies --set DEFAULT
  # will set standart policy
  # many javaws or https applications may cause to work

sudo  update-crypto-policies --set LEGACY
  # will allow  insecure algorithms
  # is your failing javaws or https applications fixed?

sudo  update-crypto-policies --set FUTURE
  # will harden your computer
  # nearly no  javaws or https application will remain working

</pre>

=== Shenandoah  ===
<pre>
   # jdk8 and jdk11 have new garabge collector (on x86_64 and aarch64)
   # you can use it via:
java -XX:+UseShenandoahGC  ohter_params_as_ususal
   # or set it up globally:
export JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS="-XX:+UseShenandoahGC $JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS"
   # are you applications working with Shenandoah? 
   # are they working better?

</pre>

=== JAVA_HOME ===
* See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Decouple_system_java_setting_from_java_command_setting for more details.
* JAVA_HOME is partially deprecated, partially very common environment variable for java programmers and admins.
* As fedora user, you should not be facing it.
* Fedora always uses *default* JRE/JDK (currenlty8) to  build and run application. As fedora packager or developer,  you may need it to change system JDK for both build and runtime. 
<pre>
   # is JAVA_HOME working for you?
</pre>
==== JAVA_HOME for common user ====
* Fedora always uses *default* JRE/JDK (currenlty8) to  run application. 
* all java applications are also build by this JDK.
* no metter what JRE you have selected via alternatives, default jdk is used
* if you wish to run Fedora's packaged java applications,  with different JDK,  you must enforce it via JAVA_HOME
<pre>
   # this is tricky to verify. Are you sure?
   # is JAVA_HOME working for you?
</pre>

=== Install Only JDK ===
* Our RPMs, can be installed fully in paralel:
* To enable this very special case, you have to modify '''/etc/dnf/dnf.conf''' and add/modify  '''installonlypkgs'''
<pre>
installonlypkgs=list_of_packages_you_care_about
</pre>
The list differs if you care about headless jre only, or full JDK. eg.:
<pre>
installonlypkgs=java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless java-1.8.0-openjdk java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel
</pre>
Most commonly: 
<pre>
installonlypkgs=java-1.8.0-openjdk*
</pre>
Or: 
<pre>
installonlypkgs=java-11-openjdk*
</pre>
This case, however hard to maintain is really used by people developing java itself. Also it is very useful for admins, who cna try to deploy application on newer version by parts, or try first.
<pre>
   # is the multiple install feature working for you as advertised?
</pre>

== Exploratory testing ==

If you run out of test cases, congratulations! But that's not the end! You can still help out by playing around with the various installs uninstalls parallel isntalls jre/jdk switching...   in whatever ways you can think of: try out all the things you can find.  Get creative! Any problems you find please file a bug, or report to the IRC channel.

== Reporting bugs ==

If you have problems with any of the tests, report a bug to [https://bugzilla.redhat.com Bugzilla] usually for the component [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&version=28&component=java-openjdk java-openjdk] or [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&version=28&component=java-11-openjdk java-11-openjdk] or [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Fedora&version=28&component=java-1.8.0-openjdk java-1.8.0-openjdk]. If you are unsure about exactly how to file the report or what other information to include, just ask on IRC and we will help you.

== Test Results ==
=== Install ===
{|
! User
! Profile
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_java_install java install]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_java-devel_install java-devel install]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_java-openjdk_install java-openjdk install]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_java-11-openjdk_install java-11-openjdk install]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_java-1.8.0-openjdk_install java-1.8.0-openjdk install]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_java-9-openjdk_install java-9-openjdk install]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_icedtea-web_install icedtea-web install]
! References
|-
| [[User:andrlos|andrlos]]
| f29-x64
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}<ref>{{bz|1633332}} java 1.8.0 configs missing in /etc/java</ref>{{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:nabooengineer|nabooengineer]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|warn}}<ref>I rolled back the initial VM snapshot each time to do a fresh install vs. installing each additive. Then installed all of them to test the alternatives switching.</ref>{{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|fail}}<ref>sudo dnf install java-9-openjdk
Last metadata expiration check: 0:04:00 ago on Tue 25 Sep 2018 11:43:45 PM EDT.
No match for argument: java-9-openjdk
Error: Unable to find a match
</ref>
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:spathare|spathare]]
| Fedora 29 Workstation x86_64
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:stooke|stooke]]
| 
| {{result|pass}}<ref>I found the different separators between the package names and java versions slightly confusing, and for a second thought it was downgrading.  This was totally my carelessness, but I thought I'd admit to it.

$ java --version
openjdk 11-ea 2018-09-25
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 11-ea+22)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 11-ea+22, mixed mode, sharing)

RPM install:

Installing:
 java-11-openjdk              x86_64     1:11.0.ea.28-2.fc29       updates-testing     193 k

All I saw was the "+22" and "-2" until I looked carefully.  </ref>
| {{result|pass}}<ref>Sorry, I just read the test case again, and this was expected behaviour.  As a user, I would find it very confusing - if I dnf install java , then I would expect the java-devel package to be the same version.</ref>{{result|fail}}<ref>sudo dnf install java-devel offered to (and I let it) install 
(1/3): java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.181.b15-0.fc29.x86_64.rpm                    103 kB/s | 234 kB     00:02    
(2/3): java-1.8.0-openjdk-devel-1.8.0.181.b15-0.fc29.x86_64.rpm              651 kB/s | 9.8 MB     00:15    
(3/3): java-1.8.0-openjdk-headless-1.8.0.181.b15-0.fc29.x86_64.rpm           875 kB/s |  32 MB     00:37  

I would expect JDK 11 !</ref>
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|warn}}<ref>JDK 11 was installed by default on my version of f29, so I got "already installed"</ref>
| 
| 
| 
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:stooke|stooke]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| 
| 
| 
| 
| {{result|pass}}<ref>(already installed)</ref>
| {{result|pass}}<ref>"Error: Unable to find a match"</ref>
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>

|-
|}

=== Multiple installs ===
{|
! User
! Profile
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-11-devel installs]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-devel installs]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-1.8.0-devel]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-11-devel and java-10-devel installs]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-11-devel and java-1.8.0-devel installs]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-10-devel and java-10-devel installs]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2018-09-26:java_8,_10_and_11_testday#Install_Only_JDK multiple java-11-devel and java-10-devel and java-1.8.0-devel installs]
! References

|-
|}

=== switch JRE/JDK ===
{|
! User
! Profile
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_Switching_JRE/JDK_install swtich JRE/JDK]
! References
|-
| [[User:nabooengineer|nabooengineer]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}<ref>Awesome, just be aware that some familiarity with alternatives & java helps to do this test. The "How to test" instructions are a little nebulous, as such not as clean as the install "How to test".</ref>
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:spathare|spathare]]
| Fedora 29 Workstation x86_64
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:stooke|stooke]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}<ref>I think it might be confusing if java gets you 1.8, while javac gets you 11 - the mismatch should be flagged with a warning, at 'alternatives' time somehow</ref>
| <references/>

|-
|}

=== crypto config ===
{|
! User
! Profile
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_Systemwide_crypto_policy system wide]
! References
|-
| [[User:nabooengineer|nabooengineer]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}<ref>DEFAULT, LEGACY & FUTURE worked as expected.</ref>
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:spathare|spathare]]
| Fedora 29 Workstation x86_64
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:stooke|stooke]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>

|-
|}

=== Shenandoah ===
{|
! User
! Profile
! [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sumantrom/Draft/Testcase_Shenandoah GC testing]
! References
|-
| [[User:nabooengineer|nabooengineer]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}<ref>Decreasing the VCPU count from 4 to 1 allows me to see the better performance of ShenandoahGC over  default GC</ref>{{result|warn}}<ref>Shenandoah GC appears to be functionally working as expected. GC does seem smoother/quicker. However I don't really see a pause time impact, really need to do a performance comparison benchmark and on bare metal vs on a VM F29 install. Will require some time to setup a real test, unless we have a specific test case comparison. Do we have a specific comparison?</ref>
| <references/>

|-
|}

=== rpm/dnf ops ===
{|
! User
! Profile
! [http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA:Java_rpm_Testcase&redirect=yes java]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA:Java-devel_rpm_Testcase&redirect=yes java-devel]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA:Java-openjdk_rpm_Testcase&redirect=yes java-openjdk]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA:Java-11-openjdk_rpm_Testcase&redirect=yes java-11-openjdk]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA:Java-1.8.0-openjdk_rpm_Testcase&redirect=yes java-1.8.0-openjdk]
! [http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA:Icetea_web_rpm_Testcase&redirect=yes icedtea-web]
! References
|-
| [[User:nabooengineer|nabooengineer]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>
|-
| [[User:stooke|stooke]]
| Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-29_Beta-1.5 + Updates
| {{result|fail}}<ref>"sudo dnf remove java" offered to remove all versions of java on my system, yet "sudo dnf remove java-devel" only offered to remove JDK 1.8.0.  This is inconsistent.</ref>
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}
| {{result|pass}}{{result|pass}}
| 
| {{result|pass}}
| <references/>

|-
|}


 [[Category: Fedora 29 Test Days]]