Java 10 compatibility Issue

[audit4j]

Java 10 compatibility Issue

[bcaure]

I don't have any problem with Java 10 besides method isJDK_N_OrHigher(int n)
Could you post your audit4j config?

[billdinger]

I'm also having the issue with java 11 @bcaure

java --version
java 11.0.4 2019-07-16 LTS
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment 18.9 (build 11.0.4+10-LTS)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 18.9 (build 11.0.4+10-LTS, mixed mode

Exception being thrown is:

Caused by: org.audit4j.core.exception.InitializationException: Java version is not supported.
        at org.audit4j.core.Context.checkEnvironment(Context.java:315) ~[audit4j-core-2.5.0.jar:2.5.0]
        at org.audit4j.core.Context.init(Context.java:121) ~[audit4j-core-2.5.0.jar:2.5.0]

If I flip it to 1.8

java -version
java version "1.8.0_221"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_221-b11)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.221-b11, mixed mode)

it executes without issues. Using latest (2.5.0) of audit4j

[billdinger]

Hrrm I debugged this on my home PC and when manually substituting in the version number in private static boolean isJDK_N_OrHigher(int n) when running the test it works fine. I wonder if the issue more has to do with the System.getProperty("java.version"); on mac returning something weird. I'll take a look at work tomorrow when I get back.

[pauldambra]

I'm getting this on trying to update a project to java 11 on my mac

[pauldambra]

If I run System.out.println(System.getProperty("java.version")) in a shell in IntelliJ

I get 11.0.2 as the output

[pauldambra]

@janithb any chance we could merge this (or fix it another way :))

I've an app at work that depends on this library (thank you for it btw) and we can't update to Java 11 because of this issue.

[billdinger]

@pauldambra I was able to eventually fix this on my mac by wiping out the JDK and doing a fresh install of adoptopenjdk. I'm still unsure what on my mac caused it but that did fix it.

[pauldambra]

I can't risk having to try and do that through CI and into multiple application servers though

The code change I've proposed does remove the issue (I think)

It removes the need for this comment https://github.com/audit4j/audit4j-core/pull/94/files#diff-977dbf33e7beb1cd8309627cf774cbdfL53

[jamietanna]

I'd be happy picking up this issue if that's OK? 😄

[pauldambra]

Do you have commit permissions on this repo @jamietanna ?

We've forked here https://github.com/coopdigital/audit4j-core (although looks like we've not updated it yet :/)

[jamietanna]

No I don't @pauldambra - I was thinking of raising a PR to this repo via a fork of my own

[pauldambra]

Ah, yeah, I've had a PR open for it for months. It's either abandoned or the maintainer doesn't want this fix. I'll check on Monday why we haven't updated our fork. We've been super busy the last couple weeks but the intention is to leave our fork available with the fix

…

On Sat, 3 Oct 2020, 11:38 Jamie Tanna, ***@***.***> wrote: No I don't @pauldambra <https://github.com/pauldambra> - I was thinking of raising a PR to this repo via a fork of my own — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#85 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHQN4PRO3DVJM7XPKFJPZTSI35L7ANCNFSM4F66CGZQ> .

[jamietanna]

Oh sorry I didn't realise, that makes sense

[pauldambra]

No worries :) #94 that's my PR

I don't have time to review yours this weekend (sorry!) you're welcome to review mine though!