Ignore if you couldn't care less about "To Diff Or Not..".
----------------------------------------------------------
> The Open Group has its own business realities to deal with.
> Your demand -- that they adopt your favorite business model
> for sharing source -- seems an awfully harsh one for judging
> the merit of their efforts. And is it necessarily the fastest
> or surest way of solving your problems?
I am not making a demand. The togri_thread v1 port brings
me back to where I was some dozen of Debian/RedHat/glibc/libc5
installs ago, when Blackdown/SBB and SN 1.1.3/1.1.5/1.1.6 JDK,
too, failed the simple tests I mentioned above. I do not
have the option to get into yet another "submit bug report-wait"
loop.
Blackdown is trying to maintain a Linux JDK port as open as
possible given SMI restrictions, as efficient as possible
given that SMI does not maintain a "genunix/linux" codebase,
only a "solaris" one.
The Blackdown diffs (along with the JDK source) also enable
me to track bugs in a more direct manner (at least in theory).
I do not know what OG tries to sell, but there are basically
two possibilities:
a) they are smart enough to use the diffs published by
Blackdown to bring their "product" up to speed
b) they ignore those diffs to make sure they "own"
something ultimately owned by SMI already
In both cases their biz model seems to get in the way of
efficiency. I am not going as far as Linus stating something
like "Java is Dead", but for my particular application
neither the noble efforts of Blackdown nor the possibly noble
but not as noble efforts of "Open" Group provided me with
a minimal *development* environment on Linux (not even
talking about production release). From over here it doesn't
look like the current state of Java in general, and Linux
Java in particular, warrants concerns about business on the
level of "Hide My Patch". IMO and all.
b.
