8370100: Redundant .png files in Linux app-image cause unnecessary bloat #27928

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2025-10-22T04:36:25Z

Don't put the default icon (.png) files in the app image on Linux.

A simple fix would be to add a condition to LinuxPackagingPipeline.writeLauncherIcons() without changing interfaces in the model. However, this would leave unaddressed a long-standing issue with ApplicationImageUtils.createLauncherIconResource() function that requires the main launcher to calculate an icon resource for an additional launcher. At the packaging phase, any Launcher instance should be self-sufficient. Fixing ApplicationImageUtils.createLauncherIconResource() required adding a new interface ResourceDirLauncherIcon to the model and changing the semantics of the DefaultLauncherIcon interface.

A new ApplicationBuilder.normalizeLauncherProperty() function has been added to calculate the value of an additional launcher's property from the value of this property in the main launcher. The function is supposed to calculate a description, shortcuts, an icon, and any future launcher property. For now, it is used to calculate the launcher icon.

Progress

Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

JDK-8370100: Redundant .png files in Linux app-image cause unnecessary bloat (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Alexander Matveev (@sashamatveev - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/27928/head:pull/27928
$ git checkout pull/27928

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/27928
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/27928/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 27928

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 27928

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27928.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

bridgekeeper · 2025-10-22T04:37:45Z

👋 Welcome back asemenyuk! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2025-10-22T04:38:50Z

@alexeysemenyukoracle This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8370100: Redundant .png files in Linux app-image cause unnecessary bloat

Reviewed-by: almatvee

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 33 new commits pushed to the master branch:

2f61391: 8370387: Remove handling of InterruptedIOException from java.io classes
4e8e55d: 8370633: Remove dead code for Windows file path canonicalization functions
70aa367: 8370520: GenShen: Track and report on promotion failures
... and 30 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/586235896536cde293402167775d4d60f1426a9e...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

openjdk · 2025-10-22T04:39:34Z

@alexeysemenyukoracle The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

openjdk · 2025-10-23T05:47:22Z

@alexeysemenyukoracle this pull request can not be integrated into master due to one or more merge conflicts. To resolve these merge conflicts and update this pull request you can run the following commands in the local repository for your personal fork:

git checkout JDK-8370100
git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git master
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# resolve conflicts and follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge master"
git push

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2025-10-24T04:36:23Z

@sashamatveev PTAL

mlbridge · 2025-10-24T04:39:39Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (0ad210ba)
00: Full (15ef5d5a)

… of the launcher icon; Before this change, the function getting a resource for an additional launcher icon took both the additional launcher and the main launcher as input. Now its result doesn't depend on the main launcher.

…Shortcuts() methods

openjdk · 2025-10-24T21:37:42Z

@alexeysemenyukoracle Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it invalidates existing review comments. Note for future reference, the bots always squash all changes into a single commit automatically as part of the integration. See OpenJDK Developers’ Guide for more information.

sashamatveev

Can you update JBS description or this PR to describe additional changes? Based on JBS description: If --icon or --linux-shortcut options are not specified, jpackage should not add .png files to the app image.. Should it be like 2-3 lines fix?

sashamatveev · 2025-10-25T04:12:28Z

src/jdk.jpackage/linux/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/LinuxPackagingPipeline.java

+
+        pkg.ifPresent(_ -> {
+            builder.task(LinuxAppImageTaskID.LAUNCHER_ICONS).noaction().add();
+        });


Can you explain what this code do? We already have LAUNCHER_ICONS task at line 55. Why we need a second one and without action?

This is the same task but with a disabled action. Task graph doesn't allow multiple tasks with the same ID.

By default, the LAUNCHER_ICONS task copies launcher icon files to the app image. However, when bundling a native package, this action should not be executed because the DesktopIntegration class adds launcher icons to the package.

Before this change, jpackage copied launcher icon files twice when building a native package: in LAUNCHER_ICONS task and in DesktopIntegration class.

Function name add() is confusing. Should be apply() or commit().

Thanks for explanation. Make sense now. Should we do something like:

if (pkg.isEmpty()) { .task(LinuxAppImageTaskID.LAUNCHER_ICONS) .addDependent(BuildApplicationTaskID.CONTENT) .applicationAction(LinuxPackagingPipeline::writeLauncherIcons).add(); }

Add task only for application image vs adding it always and then overwriting with noaction()?

We can do this, but this will complicate building the task graph by making the set of nodes and edges conditional.

It is simpler to build the graph unconditionally, but configure actions for the nodes conditionally.

E.g.: mac packaging task graph is way more sophisticated in terms of branching, see - MacPackagingPipeline.build(). but its initialization is quite stratighforward.

sashamatveev · 2025-10-25T04:23:23Z

src/jdk.jpackage/share/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/ApplicationBuilder.java

        return this;
    }

+    static <T extends Launcher> ApplicationLaunchers normalizeIcons(


Can you explain why we need this code?

Previously, ApplicationImageUtils.createLauncherIconResource() function required the Application instance to get the icon of a launcher because for additional launchers getting icon was a function taking the main launcher into account.

normalizeIcons() modifies application launchers so that they contain complete information about their icons.
The follow-up for this change, ApplicationImageUtils.createLauncherIconResource(), is modified to no longer require an Application instance.

There are other properties in additional launchers that depend on the main launcher: description, shortcuts. Each is calculated in a unique way.

Descripton:

jdk/src/jdk.jpackage/share/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/FromParams.java

Line 232 in 32697bf

launcherParams.put(DESCRIPTION.getID(), DESCRIPTION.fetchFrom(mainParams));

Shortcuts:

jdk/src/jdk.jpackage/share/classes/jdk/jpackage/internal/FromParams.java

Line 176 in 32697bf

static Optional<LauncherShortcut> findLauncherShortcut(

So we have three functions doing the same thing: they calculate the value of a property of an additionl launcher from the value in the property file of the additional launcher and the value of this property of the main launcher. The logic is the same in all these functions: if an additional launcher doesn't explicitly set the value of a property, it should be copied from the main launcher.

I moved this logic to a single function - ApplicationBuilder.normalizeLauncherProperty(). Currently, it is used for launcher icons only, but later will be used for other launcher poroperties.

sashamatveev

Looks good. Thanks for detailed explanation.

alexeysemenyukoracle · 2025-10-28T03:08:54Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2025-10-28T03:10:22Z

Going to push as commit 327b7c3.
Since your change was applied there have been 35 commits pushed to the master branch:

460a69b: 8017266: Background is painted taller than needed for styled text.
b3e63ae: 8370649: Add intermittent tag for gc/shenandoah/generational/TestOldGrowthTriggers.java
2f61391: 8370387: Remove handling of InterruptedIOException from java.io classes
... and 32 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/586235896536cde293402167775d4d60f1426a9e...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2025-10-28T03:10:31Z

@alexeysemenyukoracle Pushed as commit 327b7c3.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

openjdk bot added the core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org label Oct 22, 2025

alexeysemenyukoracle marked this pull request as draft October 22, 2025 04:42

alexeysemenyukoracle force-pushed the JDK-8370100 branch from e5c6ba4 to e280bb5 Compare October 22, 2025 19:55

openjdk bot added the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Oct 23, 2025

alexeysemenyukoracle force-pushed the JDK-8370100 branch from e280bb5 to 689f6d9 Compare October 23, 2025 11:50

openjdk bot removed the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Oct 23, 2025

alexeysemenyukoracle force-pushed the JDK-8370100 branch from 3e36592 to 074a42a Compare October 24, 2025 01:32

alexeysemenyukoracle marked this pull request as ready for review October 24, 2025 04:36

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Oct 24, 2025

alexeysemenyukoracle added 8 commits October 24, 2025 17:34

Don't add the default launcher icon to app image on Linux

0cdc22a

LinuxHelper: revamp

e1e7840

IconTest: revamp

1042c60

LinuxPackagingPipeline, WinPackagingPipeline: remove unused normalize…

8edcde4

…Shortcuts() methods

Fix fa icon verification on Linux

832fe7b

FileAssociations: revert redundant change

960fb20

DefaultLauncherIcon: blessed-modifier-order.sh fix

0ad210b

alexeysemenyukoracle force-pushed the JDK-8370100 branch from 15ef5d5 to 0ad210b Compare October 24, 2025 21:36

sashamatveev reviewed Oct 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

sashamatveev approved these changes Oct 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 28, 2025

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Oct 28, 2025

openjdk bot closed this Oct 28, 2025

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

8370100: Redundant .png files in Linux app-image cause unnecessary bloat #27928

8370100: Redundant .png files in Linux app-image cause unnecessary bloat #27928

Conversation

alexeysemenyukoracle commented Oct 22, 2025 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 22, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Oct 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Oct 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Oct 23, 2025

Uh oh!

alexeysemenyukoracle commented Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Oct 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Oct 24, 2025

Uh oh!

sashamatveev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sashamatveev Oct 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexeysemenyukoracle Oct 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sashamatveev Oct 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexeysemenyukoracle Oct 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sashamatveev Oct 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexeysemenyukoracle Oct 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sashamatveev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alexeysemenyukoracle commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Oct 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

alexeysemenyukoracle commented Oct 22, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Oct 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

openjdk bot commented Oct 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Oct 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading