Bug 101956 - FILEOPEN: No JRE or JDK found in OSX 10.9 and lower, 10.10 and up need full JDK
Summary: FILEOPEN: No JRE or JDK found in OSX 10.9 and lower, 10.10 and up need full JDK
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: LibreOffice
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Base (show other bugs)
Version:
(earliest affected)
unspecified
Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64) Mac OS X (All)
: medium critical
Assignee: Not Assigned
QA Contact:
URL: http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 103232 106314 112090 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks: Java-Runtime-JRE
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2016-09-07 07:46 UTC by Alex Thurgood
Modified: 2017-09-21 14:54 UTC (History)
18 users (show)

See Also:
Crash report or crash signature:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Alex Thurgood 2016-09-07 07:46:22 UTC
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #94716 +++

Bug 94716 has been fixed. However, the fix for that bug caused LibreOffice to no longer be able to detect either a JRE (Apples JVM6 in combination with an Oracle JRE) or JDK on OSX versions 10.9 or lower.

LibreOffice is currently built for production release against a minimum OSX version of 10.8, which means that we should support all of the available functionality in such a release including access to Java instantiation.

At present, OSX users who require Java functionality, including any that created embedded databases which worked previously, no longer have access to that functionality in current builds.
Comment 1 John Toliver 2016-10-11 13:36:57 UTC
Question for inital poster: While this bug is being triaged and investigated, is it known what the last know working version of Libreoffice that does see the JRE?

I confirm this on OS X Ver. 10.11.6 (El Capitan)
Comment 2 V Stuart Foote 2016-10-11 14:34:38 UTC
LibreOffice builds through 5.0.6.3 will run with JRE 1.8 < 99 and an Apple Java for OS X (2015-001) JRE 1.6

post bug 94716 NeoOffice provided patch to work with JDK 1.8 will not run on OS X 10.8 or 10.9 builds.

and solution for bug 101057 to use JRE/JDK > 99 was not back ported to the LibreOffice 5.0 builds.

Eventually, Oracle and Apple will resolve the OS X JavaVM issues of bug 74877 and at that point the bug 94716 patch can be removed allowing resumed use of JRE.

=-ref-=
https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1572?locale=en_US
Comment 3 V Stuart Foote 2016-10-11 14:48:07 UTC
Something might be done as in bug 85695 to alert on installation (and in Wiki of course) as to how to resolve needed Java support on OS X builds.
Comment 4 John Toliver 2016-10-11 15:04:17 UTC
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #2)
> LibreOffice builds through 5.0.6.3 will run with JRE 1.8 < 99 and an Apple
> Java for OS X (2015-001) JRE 1.6
> 
> post bug 94716 NeoOffice provided patch to work with JDK 1.8 will not run on
> OS X 10.8 or 10.9 builds.
> 
> and solution for bug 101057 to use JRE/JDK > 99 was not back ported to the
> LibreOffice 5.0 builds.
> 
> Eventually, Oracle and Apple will resolve the OS X JavaVM issues of bug
> 74877 and at that point the bug 94716 patch can be removed allowing resumed
> use of JRE.
> 
> =-ref-=
> https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1572?locale=en_US

Thanks for the update. I understand this isn't entirely a LO problem.  I will await a fix from the Apple side. I won't attempt to test if Sierra fixes this (might open more issues rather than fixing "Java Not Found").

Than you for your time.
Comment 5 Alex Thurgood 2016-10-12 10:04:41 UTC
(In reply to John Toliver from comment #4)

@John : installing a complete JDK works around the problem for current versions of LibreOffice on OSX 10.10, 10.11 and 10.12. 

I don't think you can count on Apple fixing the problem, the ball rather appears to lie in Oracle's court.
Comment 6 John Toliver 2016-10-14 03:17:23 UTC
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #5)
> (In reply to John Toliver from comment #4)
> 
> @John : installing a complete JDK works around the problem for current
> versions of LibreOffice on OSX 10.10, 10.11 and 10.12. 
> 
> I don't think you can count on Apple fixing the problem, the ball rather
> appears to lie in Oracle's court.

Thanks so much for your assistance.  I found a suitable full JDK and installed it and immediately, an instance of Java was located. Apple's behavior sometimes makes me scratch my head.
Comment 7 Alex Thurgood 2016-10-19 13:31:36 UTC
*** Bug 103232 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 8 Stephan Bergmann 2016-10-19 14:26:01 UTC
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #0)
> Bug 94716 has been fixed. However, the fix for that bug caused LibreOffice
> to no longer be able to detect either a JRE (Apples JVM6 in combination with
> an Oracle JRE) or JDK on OSX versions 10.9 or lower.

I'm a bit confused by the history of this bug and bug 94716 it got cloned from.

Can anybody actually confirm that on OS X 10.8 or 10,9 an installation of an Oracle JDK is not found by LO?
Comment 9 V Stuart Foote 2016-10-19 15:00:01 UTC
(In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #8)
> I'm a bit confused by the history of this bug and bug 94716 it got cloned
> from.
> 
> Can anybody actually confirm that on OS X 10.8 or 10,9 an installation of an
> Oracle JDK is not found by LO?

It is old NOTOURBUG bug 74877 -- and Oracle's Java runtime collision with Apples as patched for bug 94716

Oracle's issues:

http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7131356
http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=8024281

So, through 5.0, if Apples Java 1.6 is present, a JRE 1.8 will be detected and used.

But as patched at 5.1.0 with
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=32bc8ddbf335dd26019edcf12758643b4cff9913

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94716#c9
No support for Apple JRE or Oracle JRE -- just the JDK.
Comment 10 Stephan Bergmann 2016-10-19 16:36:45 UTC
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #9)
> (In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #8)
> > I'm a bit confused by the history of this bug and bug 94716 it got cloned
> > from.
> > 
> > Can anybody actually confirm that on OS X 10.8 or 10,9 an installation of an
> > Oracle JDK is not found by LO?
> 
> It is old NOTOURBUG bug 74877 -- and Oracle's Java runtime collision with
> Apples as patched for bug 94716
> 
> Oracle's issues:
> 
> http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7131356
> http://bugs.java.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=8024281
> 
> So, through 5.0, if Apples Java 1.6 is present, a JRE 1.8 will be detected
> and used.
> 
> But as patched at 5.1.0 with
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/
> ?id=32bc8ddbf335dd26019edcf12758643b4cff9913
> 
> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94716#c9
> No support for Apple JRE or Oracle JRE -- just the JDK.

I'm not sure whether that answers my question.  I do understand that, since some version of LO (5.1, as you say), LO only supports (Oracle) JDKs, no longer any plain (Apple, Oracle) JREs.  However, what I'm unsure about is whether that change also really caused LO to not even support (Oracle) JDKs on old versions of OS X (10,8, 10.9), or whether that's an unproven claim.  Hence, my question whether anybody can actually confirm that.  (I myself don't have such an old OS X available.)  Can you confirm it?
Comment 11 Alex Thurgood 2016-10-19 16:52:46 UTC
(In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #10)


Hi Stephan,

> I'm not sure whether that answers my question.  I do understand that, since
> some version of LO (5.1, as you say), LO only supports (Oracle) JDKs, no
> longer any plain (Apple, Oracle) JREs.  However, what I'm unsure about is
> whether that change also really caused LO to not even support (Oracle) JDKs
> on old versions of OS X (10,8, 10.9), or whether that's an unproven claim. 
> Hence, my question whether anybody can actually confirm that.  (I myself
> don't have such an old OS X available.)  Can you confirm it?

In bug 94716, comments 14 and 20 confirmed this.

However, I have just tested removing the existing (and now outdated) JDK version I had on my MBPro OSX 10.9.5 machine, and installed the latest JDK8_u111. This was automatically detected by LO 5152.

From comment 26, a second confirmation that the JDK is detected on OSX 10.9.5, so maybe we should close this now as WFM (I have no idea which, if any, commit fixed this).
Comment 12 Alex Thurgood 2016-10-19 16:53:33 UTC
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #11)
> (In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #10)
> 
> 


> 
> From comment 26, a second confirmation that the JDK is detected on OSX
> 10.9.5, so maybe we should close this now as WFM (I have no idea which, if
> any, commit fixed this).


Or change the title to reflect the above.
Comment 13 Stephan Bergmann 2016-10-19 17:09:25 UTC
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #11)
> (In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #10)
> In bug 94716, comments 14 and 20 confirmed this.

bug 94716 comment 14 indeed looks like confirmation :)

bug 94716 comment 20 mentions "Oracle JDK 8.101", so probably ran into the problem that LO didn't support JDKs with update version number > 99, fixed with <https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=64d3270a89fd88d4d0cf70329af2c66f722fd95e> "Related: tdf#101057 allow java update version number > 99"

> However, I have just tested removing the existing (and now outdated) JDK
> version I had on my MBPro OSX 10.9.5 machine, and installed the latest
> JDK8_u111. This was automatically detected by LO 5152.
> 
> From comment 26, a second confirmation that the JDK is detected on OSX
> 10.9.5, so maybe we should close this now as WFM (I have no idea which, if
> any, commit fixed this).

Yes, I think closing as WFM would be best then.
Comment 14 Stephan Bergmann 2016-10-19 17:14:21 UTC
(In reply to Alex Thurgood from comment #12)
> Or change the title to reflect the above.

Why change the title yet again?  V Stuart Foote today changed it from "FILEOPEN: No JRE or JDK found in OSX 10.9 and lower" to "FILEOPEN: No JRE or JDK found in OSX 10.9 and lower, 10.10 and up need full JDK" for no apparent reason.  Lets keep this bug focused on the claim that LO no longer detected JDKs on old OS X after <https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=32bc8ddbf335dd26019edcf12758643b4cff9913> "tdf#94716 allow Oracle's JDK to be used on OS X 10.10 and 10.11".  (If there's demand for a bug to track that LO now no longer detects JREs on any OS X, then either keep that to the original bug 94716 or create a new one.)
Comment 15 V Stuart Foote 2016-10-19 17:30:17 UTC
Changed the title because with bug 94716 closed, folks on 10.10-10.12 with issues of needing the JDK were being duped here.

Though, I'm still not convinced that issue of needing the Apple 1.6 JRE in addition to an Oracle JRE/JDK is resolved for 10.8 or 10.9 users.  Suspect folks reporting success actually have the Apple 1.6 JRE installed--finding pristine hardware for a testing a baremetal install of 10.9 and then LibreOffice with an Oracle JRE/JDK is needed.
Comment 16 Alex Thurgood 2016-11-03 17:02:48 UTC
*** Bug 103605 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 17 V Stuart Foote 2017-03-04 15:41:23 UTC
*** Bug 106314 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 18 Aron Budea 2017-08-29 17:58:07 UTC
*** Bug 112090 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 19 Alex Thurgood 2017-09-21 14:54:30 UTC
*** Bug 112551 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***