Re: Sun and Inprise Java 2 announcement
> Paolo Ciccone writes: Paolo> example. JBuilder has Emacs emulation, with the standard Paolo> Swing of 1.2.2 if you press Alt-d or Ctrl-space Swing will Paolo> pass also the "d" or the blank in the editor. While the Paolo> event is processed correctly the extra character is Paolo> unaccetable, at least for us. Probably we are not the only Paolo> ones that found this bug, hopefully other developers will Paolo> benefit from this fix. FYI, all of our RC releases have a fix for this problem too. Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Porting Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
Hello to all of you, I've read the most of the discussion about the blackdown-inprise issue and I'm really annoyed (even more i'm pissed off) about the way SUN treated the blackdown-team. Now I have some questions and most of them are to SUN-representatives on this list: What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or support (testing and bugfixing) the Blackdown team in their porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this seems to be the case) a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder on Linux? Why didn't SUN try to merge the efforts of blackdown, inprise and their own? (I didn't hear any comment from SUN on this list yet) Who is porting Java 2 v1.3 to Linux? Is it SUN themselves, Inprise, blackdown, or does SUN wait until IBM does it? Did the blackdown-team get the same support from SUN as Inprise? Will there be support from SUN to te blackdown-team in the future? Will there ever be a bugfixed sunwjit? When will SUN change their java-linux website and press-announcement to honor blackdowns work and add a link to www.blackdown.org, so people who want to get java2 for linux from the SUN-website can choose which implementation they want (native threads)? Is there anyone from SUN here? At last I wish to thank the blackdown-team for their great, yet still unhonored, porting-effort, and Paolo for being part in this discussion. Jan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Native vs. green threads
We don't have to argue about native vs. green threads since the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 release does both. I understand why people need native threads, but I need green threads on Linux for handling a large number of dedicated connections to a pure Java server (see http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4075058.html). The alternative with native-thread-only implementations on Linux, like the one from IBM, is to rebuild the kernel and LinuxThreads library -- not fun (see "Linux 2.2 kernel file descriptors and tasks" and "LinuxThreads 0.7 limits" at http://www.volano.com/linux.html). I assume the Inprise Java VM will soon do both green and native threads as well. John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for the effort
Since we all (to some extent) agree that we have to have a JDK/JRE 1.2(.2 or whatever) running on Linux, I must say to Juergen first that you (since you're the most profiled member of the Blackdown team at the time being) have done a great job ! To Juergen (and the rest of the Blackdown-team): Thanks for doing this on your sparetime and at the same time taking lots of crap from people not recognizing your efforts (like "java on linux is running _way slow_", a fact that no-one seems to look at the final-prev2label glaring at you from README.linux or whereever) There will never be any mistakes from who JDK for linux originated (thanks to this mailinglist). To Inprise (Paolo is sticking his head out here :): Thanks for bringing Java2 for Linux into a commercial perspective *duck*. It's about time that someone did. Working with software requires a decent platform to work on (Linux), a decent base to program on (JDK) and decent tools to work with (XEmacs.^h^h^h^h^h JBuilder :) Thanks to you all for your efforts. These are btw my statements and opinions and since I'm a mere developer, these are _not_ the necessarily the statements of my company :) -- Jo Uthus| e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (private) Software Engineer | e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JDK 1.2.2 RC3 and RC1 VolanoMark results
I updated the Volano Report to include Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3 on Red Hat 6.1 and Inprise JDK 1.2.2 RC1 on Red Hat 6.0: The Volano Report http://www.volano.com/report.html Kevin Hendricks told me he already knows the fix for the SIGSEGV problem at just over 1000 connections (see Table 2). When I work around the problem by not setting socket timeouts, the Blackdown VM goes right up to 4000 connections. Amazing. The Inprise Java VM still hits the following bug, which Blackdown fixed in Release Candidate 3: http://www.blackdown.org/cgi-bin/jdk/incoming?id=1578 Let me know if you find any errors in the updated Volano Report. John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JIT/Hotspot/Interpretor Information
With all the recent news regarding Java/Linux (and being hit by the idea that there really isn't any useable open source Java engine), I became interested in the general topic of JITs, Hotspot-type engines (what's it called .. dynamic compilation?) and bytecode interpretors. Can anyone recommend some papers and/or sites (or even class notes) that introduces these topics and discusses them in detail? Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
Oh guys ! Wake up ! Hands up all those who believe that David and Goliath have the same goals and ethics. As my old Grandma used to say: He who expects to be treated by the same rules in life that he himself follows, is a damn fool. Many are directly comparing the guys at Blackdown with the _corporate_ aspirations of Sun and Inprise. Mistake. Big mistake. Good luck Chris >Hello to all of you, > >I've read the most of the discussion about the blackdown-inprise issue and I'm really annoyed (even >more i'm pissed off) about the way SUN treated the blackdown-team. > >Now I have some questions and most of them are to SUN-representatives on this list: > >What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or support (testing and bugfixing) the >Blackdown team in their porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this seems to be the case) >a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder on Linux? > >Why didn't SUN try to merge the efforts of blackdown, inprise and their own? >(I didn't hear any comment from SUN on this list yet) > >Who is porting Java 2 v1.3 to Linux? Is it SUN themselves, Inprise, blackdown, or does SUN wait until >IBM does it? > >Did the blackdown-team get the same support from SUN as Inprise? > >Will there be support from SUN to te blackdown-team in the future? > >Will there ever be a bugfixed sunwjit? > >When will SUN change their java-linux website and press-announcement to honor blackdowns work and >add a link to www.blackdown.org, so people who want to get java2 for linux from the SUN-website can >choose which implementation they want (native threads)? > >Is there anyone from SUN here? > >At last I wish to thank the blackdown-team for their great, yet still unhonored, porting-effort, and >Paolo for being part in this discussion. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Java 2 for 2.0.x kernel?
Hi, are there any plans from blackdown or Sun/Inprise to support Java 2 on 2.0.x kernels (or libc5 systems)? Not everybody wants to update his system... Best regards Martin -- Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Straße 8, D-28359 Bremen Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fax +49 421 20419-10 PGP signature
praise and respect for blackdown - but never for sun
To the blackdown team: Praise, Respect and Many Thanks for the great work guys. Don't give up the fight. To inprise: As derek says, "watch your back" To sun: Don't ever expect to get respect in the community with moves like this one - and I don't mean the "community" that the pathetic community license refers to. That's my personal $.02 -- dimitris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JDK 1.2.2 RC3 with some JITs
Hi Blackdown guys, I was noticed the problem which JDK 1.2.2 RC2 had (0x8000 / -1). But still a problem is preventing the RC3 from working with some JITs. For instance, with Inprise JIT (libjavacomp.so) for JDK 1.2pre2 which is released in Oct, it contained in Inprese/Sun 1.2.2 RC1 and shuJIT 0.3.13, I'm facing a problem on exception handling with signal. On JDK 1.2 pre2, the signal handler provided by the JITs return with TRUE as return value and JVM can continues to run. But JDK 1.2.2 RC3 raises SIGSEGV after the signal handler returns. Therefore the JITs which utilize signals for exception handling don't work well with the RC3. Inprise/Sun 1.2.2 RC1 doesn't have this problem. It is unfortunate that the Blackdown team doesn't know requirements of JIT well. It is more unfortunate that Inprise gave me so bad impression today. :) Kazuyuki SHUDO Happy Hacking! Muraoka Lab., Grad. School of Sci. & Eng., Waseda Univ. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Blackdown JDK vs Sun JDK
> Another big Ditto from me. > > James Seigel wrote: > > > I think this group knows who to credit for the work in the trenches when no one > > else was supporting us developers on the Linux platform. As always I give thanks > > to blackdown for their supreme efforts to make this real! > > I also hope that some of the benefits flow back from the Sun/Imprise/IBM efforts to the blackdown team. I think it is imporant for Sun to ensure that this happens. If efforts such as the excellent effort put in by the blackdown team, ultimately end up being just a source for exploitation by the commercial releases, so they can add 10% and release a better product, then the people behind these efforts are going to be quickly disillusioned and they will leave. If the Sun Community process becomes a one way street, in this fashon, then it will die a quick death. The race between commercial vendors, while VERY helpful in providing focussed resources and money on the problem, does miss out on the "Community" side of the development fence, the cooperation bits, the reduction of duplicated effort and building a shared common product, rather than many similar products. This may be a product of the Sun community licence. Personally I believe the GNU licence supports this community process better, but am interested to see how the Sun licence develops. Anyway, thanks again to all the blackdown developers, your efforts are much appreciated and have done much for a long time a to fill a java void on linux. Cheers Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems with the native threads on Linux
Hi ! I am using jdk117_v3 on RH6.1 and RH6.0 . Here jdb hangs if I set the THREADS_FLAG to native , but it works properly if it equals to green. Any info on this? Please let me know whether java native threads works properly on RH6.1 and RH6.0. Thanks in advance Regards Pramila
unsubscribe
take me out of this listing please __ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun/Inprise/GPL Linux JDK
Hi I wonder what would happen if any of the Blackdown developers had put a GPL license in any part of their code fixes? How would that affect Sun's Community Source license? Maybe GPL was a good idea after all? Now we see what they mean by protecting your rights to give away your software. A well wisher. Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Blackdown JDK vs Sun JDK
I am eager to buy it. Could you tell us when it will be available? Jacob Nikom Nathan Meyers wrote: > > Man, it's hard to keep up with this business! > > When the industry's first book about Java/Linux hits the streets in a > few weeks, it'll have several chapters about Blackdown and the Blackdown > port, and not a word about the Inprise port -- final editing was > completed weeks ago. > > But thanks to a deal the publisher made with Inprise months ago, the > book's CD-ROM will have JBuilder and, well... I guess it'll also have > the Inprise JDK (although I don't really know and it's not under my > control). > > The drama never ceases. This is not a business for the faint of heart > :-). > > Nathan Meyers > Author, "Java Programming on Linux" > Macmillan Computer Press > http://www.javalinux.net > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Blackdown JDK vs Sun JDK
Jacob Nikom wrote: > > I am eager to buy it. Could you tell us when it will be available? > > Jacob Nikom The publisher is advertising a 12/21/1999 publication date; there should be general shelf availability in January. I'll send a note to the list when it's available. Nathan > > Nathan Meyers wrote: > > > > Man, it's hard to keep up with this business! > > > > When the industry's first book about Java/Linux hits the streets in a > > few weeks, it'll have several chapters about Blackdown and the Blackdown > > port, and not a word about the Inprise port -- final editing was > > completed weeks ago. > > > > But thanks to a deal the publisher made with Inprise months ago, the > > book's CD-ROM will have JBuilder and, well... I guess it'll also have > > the Inprise JDK (although I don't really know and it's not under my > > control). > > > > The drama never ceases. This is not a business for the faint of heart > > :-). > > > > Nathan Meyers > > Author, "Java Programming on Linux" > > Macmillan Computer Press > > http://www.javalinux.net > > > > -- > > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Blackdown JDK vs Sun JDK
I personally must say that I am the most happy person since blackdowns RC2 came out recently. It works absolutely stable, without problems (yes, I've solved the Zapd-Dingbats-hit-me-dead-problem). Very good work, very stable. Today Sun anounced with Inprise the release of Java2 RC1 for linux. Not mentioning neither blackdown nor their efforts to give java to the linux-community. Great. After months and months and months and months of waiting for sun to finally start working on a reliable java2 for linux they finally got it running. Running. No SMP, no native threads a.s.o.. When did sun say that they are going to support the linux-platform?!? The question I have is very simple. On windows, Jdk 1.2 is out for a year, jdk1.3 is almost done. Hotspot is done. Sound and 3d is done. Why does it take a multi billion $-company like sun so long to fulfill their promise of "write once, run everywhere"?? Why does it need a couple of open-source-guys to port java to the linux-platform? Sun is a multi-billion-dollar-company! Don't they have enough developers to do this? And why do they put their money into a M$-addicted company like inprise instead of using it to support the blackdown-team? >From my point of view I will use the blackdown port as long as blackdown exists. They seem to be much more trustworthy and reliable. Keep on the good work, don't let yourself be demotivated by such a commercial sh... . Greetings Gunnar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jre 1.2: "d" instead of "ä"
Hi, while running the jre1.2 with metal l&f I get "d"s instead of "ä"s in dialog titles -- but no warnings or errors from the jvm. Anybody got an idea how to fix this? Seems X somehow get's the wrong font (which?). Thanks in advance Martin -- Martin Schröder, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ArtCom GmbH, Grazer Straße 8, D-28359 Bremen Voice +49 421 20419-44 / Fax +49 421 20419-10 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun/Inprise/GPL Linux JDK
a b wrote: > Hi > > I wonder what would happen if any of the Blackdown developers had put a GPL > license in any part of their code fixes? > > How would that affect Sun's Community Source license? Aparat from the fact that such an act is illegal according to the non-commercial license agreement, probably not much. AFAIK, Sun owns the code for the bug fixes that blackdown produces and probably the ported code by virtue of the fact Blackdown used Sun proprietary code to generate it. > Maybe GPL was a good idea after all? Now we see what they mean by > protecting your rights to give away your software. IMO, the LGPL is a better idea for java. GPL'd code requires that any code that even links to it be GPL'd. That would kill java in corporate america. justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:55:25AM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or support (testing and >bugfixing) the > Blackdown team in their porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this seems >to be the case) > a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder on Linux? We did but we didn't get any answer back. > Will there ever be a bugfixed sunwjit? It's called Borland JIT :). Seriously the latest JIT is included in the Sun/Inprise JDK but you can use it with any other JDK 1.2 if you want. At present time there are no plans to port the JIT to other architectures than Intel. -- Paolo Ciccone JBuilder dev.team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun and Inprise Java 2 announcement
I still cannot completely agree with Brian - credit not "should be given", but must be given. If you work for the company and you patented something, the company owns the patent, but you still own your name on the patent. Company cannot change it, otherwise the patent will be invalidated. Sun owns the code, but I think they don't own the name of the person who produced that code. They cannot change it. There is something here. I worked for software companies for many years and always compared myself with ancient egyptian worker who built egyptian pyramids. Everybody admires them, but nobody knows who built them. With open source movement the situation is changing. However, I am not sure that Sun's community license and even GPL pay enough attention to the name ownership. Otherwise, we would not have "GNU/Linux" discussion, because both use GPL. Code released under my name promotes me and makes me responsible for it. Michael Young gave his IPO shares to some Linux developers years after they did their work. It created good precedent for Blackdown team. Who knows, may be McNealy is going to do something like that in the future? Jacob Nikom Brian Pomerantz wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 06:28:29PM -0500, Jacob Nikom wrote: > > But it does matter how it was claimed. If the work was done by > > Inprise it is one thing, if it is only relabeling of Blackdown > > code, it is another. > > I was speaking from a legal standpoint. According to Sun's brain-dead > license, they own all changes to derivative works. I agree that > credit should be given where it is due. > > > > > This is the text: > > "Inprise and Sun Microsystems have taken a big step toward > > maintaining open, standards-based network computing architectures > > that utilize technologies like Linux and the Java 2 platform," > > said Dale Fuller, Interim CEO and President of Inprise." > > > > > > I think it is the drawback of the "Open Source" model. Technically, > > you can take any code and release it as yours after few changes. > > > > It is interesting what guys from Inprise think about it? > > > > I think it is actually a drawback to the marketing departments not > knowing much of anything on what they create press releases out of. > Having worked at a place that was always trying to pull a press > release out of thin air, I've seen how the most innocent comment or > piece of fluff can be made to sound like ground breaking news. I > seriously doubt they meant to not hand over credit. I'm sure the > problem was that nobody told the marketing droids to specifically say > most of the Linux changes in the JDK were made by Blackdown. > > BAPper -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun/Inprise/GPL Linux JDK
"a b" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I wonder what would happen if any of the Blackdown developers had put a GPL >license in any part of their code fixes? If Blackdown had GPLed their patches, then any code that incorporated them would be GPL as well. I believe that Blackdown did not have the option to do this. They had to agree to Sun's license to get the code, they don't have a lot of choice of what license they themselves use. Sun's license is the root of the problem, from the free software point of view. >Maybe GPL was a good idea after all? Now we see what they mean by >protecting your rights to give away your software. Yes, exactly, this is why the GPL exists. In this case, I think the basic goal of free software so far still seems to have been preserved - some folks wrote some code, it got used, it got incorporated into other versions and improved them. So far, nothing proprietary has really happened. The main problem here seems to be more one of credit, which we've discussed to death now. Companies like Inprise are blundering into the free software community and making a few mistakes. It reminds me of Corel's recent mistakes with their licensing on their distribution. No malice intended, just clumsy. We should try to cut them a little slack and help them do the Right Thing. There are deeper problems lurking underneath, though, having to do with Sun's control of Java. Sun isn't interested in the ultimate goals of free software, and they're powerful enough to cause a lot of trouble with Java. We play a dangerous game in the free software world, using Java, hoping that we can trust Sun enough to not really screw people the way Microsoft has with their control of the Win32 API. The commercial world is playing the same game, too, and it's the root of so many of the schisms in the Java world. That's why I'm glad to see a big player like IBM also enter into the Java/Linux fray. The current ports are bound by Sun's lciense just like the rest, but IBM has enough muscle to push back if need be. >A well wisher. Pseudonymous one, at that. [EMAIL PROTECTED] . . . .. . . . http://www.media.mit.edu/~nelson/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:29:04AM -0800, Paolo Ciccone wrote: > On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:55:25AM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > > > What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or support (testing >and bugfixing) the > > Blackdown team in their porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this >seems to be the case) > > a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder on Linux? > > We did but we didn't get any answer back. Did you tell them that you're making a port for SUN too? > > > Will there ever be a bugfixed sunwjit? > > It's called Borland JIT :). Seriously the latest JIT is included in the > Sun/Inprise JDK but you can use it with any other JDK 1.2 if you want. > At present time there are no plans to port the JIT to other architectures > than Intel. So sunwjit.so in the blackdown-port is the same as javacomp.so? Is the float-integer-comparison-bug fixed in javacomp? > > > -- > Paolo Ciccone > JBuilder dev.team > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Open up the JDK porting effort already!
You could do almost the same thing nd possibly appease Sun at the same time by setting up a system similar to how XFree86 is set up. Create the "Blackdown Organization" who is able to sign NDAs and whatever other legal crap that Sun requires. For those that want to help on the port, they join the organization and sign a legally binding agreement that they cannot divulge the information they obtain through any NDA with persons outside of the organization. I've been wanting to join the porting effort for a while but it seems that there is nothing set up to allow more people to help out. I work at LLNL and have access to some VERY large machines running Linux and would love to be able to get Java working on them. Since they are Alpha based, there doesn't seem to be much I can do without starting from whatever source Sun has made available. It seems that with the SCSL Blackdown and/or Inprise could have a more open model of development for the Linux port. BAPper On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 04:53:37PM -0800, Matt Welsh wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nelson Minar) writes: > > I really don't want to be too critical of Blackdown. They've done a > > lot of really good work in a very difficult environment. But the > > releases and communication from Blackdown in the past few months have > > been pretty bad. We're fairly far behind in ports. Worse, though, is > > the lack of communication. We're told a new release is coming out "any > > day", then don't hear anything for weeks. > > I agree. > > I have felt for a long time that the solution is to do away with the > closed porting team, and simply release the JDK source code *and* > Linux-specific patches under the SCSL license. That way those of us > with a vested interested in getting Java to actually work on Linux can help. > > I am sure that the participants on this mailing list alone have broad > enough experience, and a large enough set of hardware environments, to > help develop and test the JDK for Linux. One thing I noticed is that > apparently nobody on the Blackdown team has an SMP system, nor are they > testing the JDK against big workloads or anything with many threads. > > The thing is, you can get the JDK 1.2 sources under the SCSL from Sun. > And you can get Linux patches from the Blackdown team. But guess what? > The two don't go together. The Blackdown patches are against an (apparently > unreleased) JDK tree internal to Sun, newer than the one you can get > under the SCSL. I tried in vain to merge the JDK sources with the > Blackdown patches, but there are too many conflicting changes. > > This porting effort is clearly not working. It hasn't been working for > a long time. If Sun is serious about supporting Java on Linux they'll put > the SCSL to the test and use it in this case. Otherwise, everyone will > simply jump ship and move over to using IBM's JDKs. I know many already have. > > Matt Welsh, UC Berkeley > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
> Paolo Ciccone writes: Paolo> On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:55:25AM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: >> What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or >> support (testing and bugfixing) the Blackdown team in their >> porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this seems to >> be the case) a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder >> on Linux? Paolo> We did but we didn't get any answer back. As said before you never contacted me or Kevin. Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Porting Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
> Jan Buchmann writes: Jan> On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:29:04AM -0800, Paolo Ciccone wrote: >> It's called Borland JIT :). Seriously the latest JIT is >> included in the Sun/Inprise JDK but you can use it with any >> other JDK 1.2 if you want. At present time there are no plans >> to port the JIT to other architectures than Intel. Jan> So sunwjit.so in the blackdown-port is the same as javacomp.so? No, sunwjit and javacomp are two different products. sunwjit is what we get from Sun (actually they bought this JIT from another company) as a binary. javacomp is Borland's JIT. I'm not sure if we'll ever see a fixed version of sunwjit as Sun seems to have given up with this product. We can't fix the bug ourselves as we don't have the source code. Jan> Is the float-integer-comparison-bug fixed in javacomp? It doesn't have the bug. Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Porting Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Font quality question
> Since I cannot currently use the Blackdown 1.2.2 RC3 release as it > requires glibc 2.1.2 and I am currently stuck at 2.1.1, I decided to try > the Imprise 1.2.2 RC1 JDK. The first thing I have noticed is that the > font rendition is terrible compared to 1.1.8. The font is huge and > ugly, no matter what font is selected. Does the same problem exist with > the Blackdown port? Yes, at least on my box. Everything's just bigger on 1.2 for some reason. -- / Peter Schuller PGP userID: 0x5584BD98 or 'Peter Schuller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>' Key retrival: Send an E-Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.scode.webprovider.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Segmentation violation with 1020 timeout sockets
I opened what I think is the last bug holding back the VolanoMark network scalability tests under Blackdown JDK 1.2.2: Bug Id 1604, "Segmentation violation with 1020 timeout sockets" http://www.blackdown.org/cgi-bin/jdk/incoming?id=1604 I guess we report these bugs to Sun and Inprise through this page? http://java.sun.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi Sun and Inprise need to fix both Blackdown Bug Id 1604 and 1578 for me to run the VolanoMark network test with their JDK 1.2.2: http://www.blackdown.org/cgi-bin/jdk/incoming?expression=neffenger John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JDK 1.2.2 RC3 and RC1 VolanoMark results
Is there any way I can get a hold of the benchmark software? I'd like to try the tya compiler with blackdown's jdk and see how it stacks up. John Neffenger wrote: > I updated the Volano Report to include Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3 on Red > Hat 6.1 and Inprise JDK 1.2.2 RC1 on Red Hat 6.0: > > The Volano Report > http://www.volano.com/report.html > > Kevin Hendricks told me he already knows the fix for the SIGSEGV problem > at just over 1000 connections (see Table 2). When I work around the > problem by not setting socket timeouts, the Blackdown VM goes right up > to 4000 connections. Amazing. > > The Inprise Java VM still hits the following bug, which Blackdown fixed > in Release Candidate 3: > > http://www.blackdown.org/cgi-bin/jdk/incoming?id=1578 > > Let me know if you find any errors in the updated Volano Report. > > John Neffenger > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
Juergen Kreileder wrote: > > Jan Buchmann writes: > > Jan> On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:29:04AM -0800, Paolo Ciccone wrote: > >> It's called Borland JIT :). Seriously the latest JIT is > >> included in the Sun/Inprise JDK but you can use it with any > >> other JDK 1.2 if you want. At present time there are no plans > >> to port the JIT to other architectures than Intel. > > Jan> So sunwjit.so in the blackdown-port is the same as javacomp.so? > > No, sunwjit and javacomp are two different products. sunwjit is what > we get from Sun (actually they bought this JIT from another company) > as a binary. javacomp is Borland's JIT. > > I'm not sure if we'll ever see a fixed version of sunwjit as Sun seems > to have given up with this product. We can't fix the bug ourselves as > we don't have the source code. I am not aware of the details of the licence agreement between blackdown and sun. Would it permit you to bundle the tya jit instead of sun's? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 06:54:44PM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:29:04AM -0800, Paolo Ciccone wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:55:25AM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > > > > > What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or support (testing >and bugfixing) the > > > Blackdown team in their porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this >seems to be the case) > > > a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder on Linux? > > > > We did but we didn't get any answer back. > Did you tell them that you're making a port for SUN too? No, because when we contacted them we were not doing it. > So sunwjit.so in the blackdown-port is the same as javacomp.so? No, javacomp.so is the JIT included in the Sun/Inprise JDK. Since out JIT is faster and has less bugs we thought there was no point in updating sunwjit. > Is the float-integer-comparison-bug fixed in javacomp? Never being there in first place. -- Paolo Ciccone JBuilder dev.team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Some benchmark results.
I ran a few benchmarks to compare the different JVM's out there, on the SPEC benchmarks plus two of our internal benchmarks, sablecc (a parser generator), and soot, a frozen version of our analysis framework. Here are the results. These results are not scientific; in particular, I only ran each benchmark once; usually we will run them five times. So they should only be considered as an approximate measurement of the performance of the various VM's. BlackdownSun Blackdown+javacomp compress 66.01 70.45 70.75 db 146.54 112.34 153.66 jack 62.57 39.05 48.58 javac71.08 46.71 58.39 jess 48.13 33.00 36.95 mpegaudio57.95 59.27 58.59 mtrt 37.97 31.93 24.11 raytrace 51.61 30.99 32.49 sablecc-w41.92 32.16 39.11 soot-j 132.19 92.76 107.88 Blackdown denotes Blackdown JDK1.2.2RC3. Sun denotes Sun/Inprise JDK1.2.2RC1. Blackdown+javacomp is Blackdown RC3, but using the javacomp JIT provided with the Sun JDK. Tests were run on a dual-processor PII/400 running kernel 2.2.8. pat -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:52:02PM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:20:46PM +0100, Juergen Kreileder wrote: > > No, sunwjit and javacomp are two different products. sunwjit is what > > we get from Sun (actually they bought this JIT from another company) > > as a binary. javacomp is Borland's JIT. > > > > I'm not sure if we'll ever see a fixed version of sunwjit as Sun seems > > to have given up with this product. We can't fix the bug ourselves as > > we don't have the source code. > > Did you contact SUN about what has happened and far more important about what will >happen in the future (JDK 1.3) with the blackdown-port? > > Maybe you can get Inprise to let them distribute javacomp with RC4 (Paolo?), since >both ports are SUN-ports. Our JIT has been free for download from our website for quite a while (http://www.borland.com). The version that is included in our JDK is basically the same with some fixes we have done in the last couple of months. -- Paolo Ciccone JBuilder dev.team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Font quality question
Juergen Kreileder wrote: > > > Peter Schuller writes: > > >> Since I cannot currently use the Blackdown 1.2.2 RC3 release as > >> it requires glibc 2.1.2 and I am currently stuck at 2.1.1, I > >> decided to try the Imprise 1.2.2 RC1 JDK. The first thing I > >> have noticed is that the font rendition is terrible compared to > >> 1.1.8. The font is huge and ugly, no matter what font is > >> selected. Does the same problem exist with the Blackdown port? > > Peter> Yes, at least on my box. Everything's just bigger on 1.2 > Peter> for some reason. > > Yep, that's a known problem. 1.2.x wants to have TrueType fonts, > XFree doesn't support that well yet. Also the bundled Lucida font > isn't really nice. > I've added a second font properties file to RC3. If you have the TT > fonts Arial, Courier New and Times New Roman you can get a better > display with this file. > > Juergen Is this a problem specific to the Linux Java port? I have noticed a problem when I run my app on Windows where I have to specify a font size of 11 in order to get fonts the same size as native windows apps which have the font size set to 8. (I run JDK 1.2 on Windows, 1.1.7 on RH 6.0) Jim -- = Jim Kimball [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JDK 1.2.2 RC3 and RC1 VolanoMark results
Hi Joseph, > Is there any way I can get a hold of the benchmark software? I'd like to > try the tya compiler with blackdown's jdk and see how it stacks up. See the section called "Download" at: http://www.volano.com/benchmarks.html John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:14:11PM +0100, Juergen Kreileder wrote: > > Paolo Ciccone writes: > > Paolo> On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:55:25AM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > >> What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or > >> support (testing and bugfixing) the Blackdown team in their > >> porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this seems to > >> be the case) a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder > >> on Linux? > > Paolo> We did but we didn't get any answer back. > > As said before you never contacted me or Kevin. True, I believe we contacted Steve. Don't take this as a criticism, I'm just trying to provide positive feedback, but it's hard to target a group of people. We didn't get any news from this list for weeks and when we tried to contact some of you we didn't get any answer. If we look at other porjects there's usually an acknowledge contact or project leader that can channel all the requests. This is, IMHO, a more efficient way of handling communication. All this mess is, again IMHO, just a communication problem. Anyway, I reported our past email exchanges and the results should be visible soon. -- Paolo Ciccone JBuilder dev.team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JDK 1.2.2 RC3 and RC1 VolanoMark results
It's available on Volano's site at http://www.volano.com/benchmarks.html Peter Joseph Shraibman wrote: > > Is there any way I can get a hold of the benchmark software? I'd like to > try the tya compiler with blackdown's jdk and see how it stacks up. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: JDK 1.2.2 RC3 and RC1 VolanoMark results
Hi Rachit, > how does it compare to the other two java ports at high connections? > your page i assume wasn't updated after you ran the 4000 connections > test. just curious. IBM JDK 1.1.8 on Linux can't get over 500 connections (a bug confirmed by IBM). Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3 fails at just over 1,000 connections (Bug Id 1604). Inprise JDK 1.2.2 RC1 fails at more than one connection over the network (Bug Id 1578). TowerJ goes right up to 4,000 connections -- about the limit on my 256 MB box. I ran a couple tests with Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 at high connection counts after disabling the socket timeouts, but I'm waiting for the bug fixes before being able to run the tests without modification for the Volano Report. John Neffenger -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Thanks for the effort
Here ! Here !!! I second the statement made in this memo. We silent, but grateful users in the linux community own you and the entire blackdown team a case of beer -- each! Thanks david Jo Uthus wrote: > Since we all (to some extent) agree that we have to have a JDK/JRE > 1.2(.2 or whatever) running on Linux, I must say to Juergen first that > you (since you're the most profiled member of the Blackdown team at > the time being) have done a great job ! > > To Juergen (and the rest of the Blackdown-team): > > Thanks for doing this on your sparetime and at the same time taking > lots of crap from people not recognizing your efforts (like "java on > linux is running _way slow_", a fact that no-one seems to look at > the final-prev2label glaring at you from README.linux or whereever) > > There will never be any mistakes from who JDK for linux originated > (thanks to this mailinglist). > > To Inprise (Paolo is sticking his head out here :): > > Thanks for bringing Java2 for Linux into a commercial perspective > *duck*. It's about time that someone did. > > Working with software requires a decent platform to work on (Linux), > a decent base to program on (JDK) and decent tools to work with > (XEmacs.^h^h^h^h^h JBuilder :) > > Thanks to you all for your efforts. > > These are btw my statements and opinions and since I'm a mere > developer, these are _not_ the necessarily the statements of my > company :) > -- > Jo Uthus| e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (private) > Software Engineer | e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun and Inprise Java 2 announcement
Fools fighting over scraps while the m$ buzzards eat caviar Jacob Nikom wrote: > I still cannot completely agree with Brian - credit not > "should be given", but must be given. If you work for the > company and you patented something, the company owns the > patent, but you still own your name on the patent. Company > cannot change it, otherwise the patent will be invalidated. > > Sun owns the code, but I think they don't own the name of > the person who produced that code. They cannot change it. > There is something here. > > I worked for software companies for many years and always > compared myself with ancient egyptian worker who built egyptian > pyramids. Everybody admires them, but nobody knows who built > them. > > With open source movement the situation is changing. However, > I am not sure that Sun's community license and even GPL pay > enough attention to the name ownership. Otherwise, we would > not have "GNU/Linux" discussion, because both use GPL. > Code released under my name promotes me and makes me responsible > for it. > > Michael Young gave his IPO shares to some Linux developers years > after they did their work. It created good precedent for Blackdown > team. Who knows, may be McNealy is going to do something like that > in the future? > > Jacob Nikom > > Brian Pomerantz wrote: > > > > On Tue, Dec 07, 1999 at 06:28:29PM -0500, Jacob Nikom wrote: > > > But it does matter how it was claimed. If the work was done by > > > Inprise it is one thing, if it is only relabeling of Blackdown > > > code, it is another. > > > > I was speaking from a legal standpoint. According to Sun's brain-dead > > license, they own all changes to derivative works. I agree that > > credit should be given where it is due. > > > > > > > > This is the text: > > > "Inprise and Sun Microsystems have taken a big step toward > > > maintaining open, standards-based network computing architectures > > > that utilize technologies like Linux and the Java 2 platform," > > > said Dale Fuller, Interim CEO and President of Inprise." > > > > > > > > > I think it is the drawback of the "Open Source" model. Technically, > > > you can take any code and release it as yours after few changes. > > > > > > It is interesting what guys from Inprise think about it? > > > > > > > I think it is actually a drawback to the marketing departments not > > knowing much of anything on what they create press releases out of. > > Having worked at a place that was always trying to pull a press > > release out of thin air, I've seen how the most innocent comment or > > piece of fluff can be made to sound like ground breaking news. I > > seriously doubt they meant to not hand over credit. I'm sure the > > problem was that nobody told the marketing droids to specifically say > > most of the Linux changes in the JDK were made by Blackdown. > > > > BAPper > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blackdown still rox!
Blackdown team, Here's a copy of a message I dropped at javalobby. Just want to let you know there are still a lot of people who really appreciate your work, and I hate to see you guys misacknowledged. I'm sure there are hundreds or thousands of Linux users who feel just like me. I would really like the Blackdown effort to continue, as a commercial company, as we see, is never as reliable as an Open Source community. If there is anything I can do to help, I'd be glad to. -- I've been a Blackdown user since... well since 1.1.5 or so. In my perception they have allways delivered. The Blackdown 1.1.7a ran Swing applications much faster and much more stable than the Windows NT port of JDK 1.2 did. I really hope that the Blackdown effort gets the credit they deserve from both Sun and Inprise. I believe that both Sun and Inprise should apologize. Maybe Blackdown, Sun and Inprise should get together and find a solution all three parties are happy with. Maybe Sun and Inprise should offer Blackdown resources and support and let Blackdown do what they're best at: Write a great JDK port! Ernst [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ernst de Haan Freelance Java Architect "Come to me all who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest" -- Jesus Christ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jdk 1.2.2rc3 segmentation fault
This is my system & what I did: - My kernel is 2.2.12 on Mandrake 6.0 - Before I installed jdk 1.2.2, I upgraded glibc 2.1.1 to 2.1.2 by applying an rpm of the pre-compiled binaries. I did a test upgrade, which worked ok, then applied these binary rpms: - glibc-devel-2.1.2-17 - glibc-profile-2.1.2-17 - glibc-2.1.2-17 A reboot worked ok. - Un-bizipp2ed and un-tarred the .bz2 into /usr/local/jdk1.2.2 - put /usr/local/jdk1.2.2/bin into my PATH - below is the output from "ldconfig -D". There are some suspicious entries. What could I have done wrong? Thanks in advance, Ron Johnson [root@rebel java]# ldconfig -D ldconfig: version 1999-02-21 /usr/X11R6/lib: libXaw3d.so.6 => libXaw3d.so.6.1 libforms.so.0.88 => libforms.so.0.88 libSDLx11.so.0.9 => libSDLx11.so.0.9.9 libglut.so.3 => libglut.so.3.7 libMesaGLU.so.3 => libMesaGLU.so.3.0 libMesaGL.so.3 => libMesaGL.so.3.0 libXpm.so.4 => libXpm.so.4.10 libMagick.so.4 => libMagick.so.4.0.23 libfont.so.1 => libfont.so.1.2 libXtst.so.6 => libXtst.so.6.1 libXt.so.6 => libXt.so.6.0 libXp.so.6 => libXp.so.6.2 libXmu.so.6 => libXmu.so.6.0 libXi.so.6 => libXi.so.6.0 libXext.so.6 => libXext.so.6.3 libXaw.so.6 => libXaw.so.6.1 libXIE.so.6 => libXIE.so.6.0 libX11.so.6 => libX11.so.6.1 libSM.so.6 => libSM.so.6.0 libPEX5.so.6 => libPEX5.so.6.0 libICE.so.6 => libICE.so.6.3 /usr/lib: libnewt.so.0.50 => libnewt.so.0.50 libxmms.so.0 => libxmms.so.0.9.0 libsnmp.so.0 => libsnmp.so.0.3.6.1 libtixsam4.1.8.0.so => libtixsam4.1.8.0.so libtix4.1.8.0.so => libtix4.1.8.0.so libtkx8.0.4.so => libtkx8.0.4.so libtclx8.0.4.so => libtclx8.0.4.so libvgagl.so.1 => libvgagl.so.1.4.0 libvga.so.1 => libvga.so.1.4.0 libpisock.so.3 => libpisock.so.3.0.1 libORBitutil.so.0 => libORBitutil.so.0.4.3 libORBitCosNaming.so.0 => libORBitCosNaming.so.0.4.3 libORBit.so.0 => libORBit.so.0.4.3 libIIOP.so.0 => libIIOP.so.0.4.3 libIDL-0.6.so.0 => libIDL-0.6.so.0.4.2 libnewt.so.0.40 => libnewt.so.0.40 libmikmod.so.1 => libmikmod.so.1.0.0 libxml.so.0 => libxml.so.0.0.0 libgtop_sysdeps.so.1 => libgtop_sysdeps.so.1.0.0 libgtop_suid_common.so.1 => libgtop_suid_common.so.1.0.0 libgtop_names.so.1 => libgtop_names.so.1.0.0 libgtop_common.so.1 => libgtop_common.so.1.0.0 libgtop.so.1 => libgtop.so.1.0.0 librle.so.1 => librle.so.1.0.0 libppm.so.1 => libppm.so.1.0.0 libpnm.so.1 => libpnm.so.1.0.0 libpgm.so.1 => libpgm.so.1.0.0 libpbm.so.1 => libpbm.so.1.0.0 libfbm.so.1 => libfbm.so.1.0.0 libghttp.so.1 => libghttp.so.1.0.0 libpuke.so.0 => libpuke.so.0.0.1 libmediatool.so.2 => libmediatool.so.2.0.0 libkspell.so.2 => libkspell.so.2.0.0 libkimgio.so.2 => libkimgio.so.2.0.0 libkhtmlw.so.2 => libkhtmlw.so.2.0.0 libkfm.so.2 => libkfm.so.2.0.0 libkfile.so.2 => libkfile.so.2.0.0 libkdeui.so.2 => libkdeui.so.2.0.0 libkdecore.so.2 => libkdecore.so.2.0.0 libkab.so.2 => libkab.so.2.0.0 libjscript.so.2 => libjscript.so.2.0.0 libutempter.so.0 => libutempter.so.0.3 libslang.so.1 => libslang.so.1.2.2 libtiff.so.3 => libtiff.so.3.4 libpng.so.2 => libpng.so.2.1.0.3 libz.so.1 => libz.so.1.1.3 libuulib.so.5 => libuulib.so.5.0.13 libmimelib.so.1 => libmimelib.so.1.0.0 libjs.so.0 => libjs.so.0.2.0 libQwSpriteField.so.1 => libQwSpriteField.so.1.5.0 libjpeg.so.62 => libjpeg.so.62.0.0 libungif.so.4 => libungif.so.4.1.0 libungif.so.3 => libungif.so.3.1.0 libqt.so.1 => libqt.so.1.44 libstdc++.so.2.9 => libstdc++.so.2.9.0 libstdc++.so.2.8 => libstdc++.so.2.8.0 libstdc++.so.2.7.2 => libstdc++.so.2.7.2.8 libg++.so.2.7.2 => libg++.so.2.7.2.8 libimlib-xpm.so.0 => libimlib-xpm.so.0.0.0 libimlib-tiff.so.0 => libimlib-tiff.so.0.0.0 libimlib-ps.so.0 => libimlib-ps.so.0.0.0 libimlib-ppm.so.0 => libimlib-ppm.so.0.0.0 libimlib-png.so.0 => libimlib-png.so.0.0.0 libimlib-jpeg.so.0 => libimlib-jpeg.so.0.0.0 libimlib-gif.so.0 => libimlib-gif.so.0.0.0 libimlib-bmp.so.0 => libimlib-bmp.so.0.0.0 libgdk_imlib.so.1 => libgdk_imlib.so.1.9.4 libImlib.so.1 => libImlib.so.1.9.4 libguile.so.4 => libguile.so.4.0.0 libgtk.so.1 => libgtk.so.1.0.6 libgdk.so.1 => libgdk.so.1.0.6 libgtk-1.2.so.0 => libgtk-1.2.so.0.2.1 libgdk-1.2.so.0 => libgdk-1.2.so.0.2.1 libobgtk.so.1 => libobgtk.so.1.1.3 libobgnome.so.0 => libobgnome.so.0.0.0 libzvt.so.2 => libzvt.so.2.2.3 libgtkxmhtml.so.1 => libgtkxmhtml.so.
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
Paolo Ciccone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 08:55:25AM +0100, Jan Buchmann wrote: > > > What I don't understand is: Why didn't Inprise ever contact or support (testing >and bugfixing) the > > Blackdown team in their porting effort, if they just wanted to have (and this >seems to be the case) > > a production quality JDK1.2.2 for running JBuilder on Linux? > > We did but we didn't get any answer back. I had a single communication with the VP of engineering at inprise, telling me that they were interested in dedicated some resources to assist with the port. I provided him with Steve Byrne's contact information and that was the last that I heard of it. If Steve wasn't answering, I would have been more than happy to redirect the inprise contact to the primary porters. I definitely wouldn't say that inprise never got any answer back. Karl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Questions to SUN, blackdown, inprise
On Wed, Dec 08, 1999 at 07:44:24PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I had a single communication with the VP of engineering at inprise, telling > me that they were interested in dedicated some resources to assist with the > port. I provided him with Steve Byrne's contact information and that was > the last that I heard of it. If Steve wasn't answering, I would have been > more than happy to redirect the inprise contact to the primary porters. Well, I'm glad that you can confirm our version. AFAIK we never got anything back from Steve and we asked several times. I'm not blaming Steve at all with this, we know you have daily jobs and you don't have much time left. We just figured that there was nothing wrong in attempting the port by ourselves. We needed 1.2.2 to run JBuilder and at that time Blackdown didn't answer any of the questions asked by several people in this list about plans for 1.2.2 and JPDA. After not receiving replies to our offer of help we went ahead and tried the port. As todays we announced the availabily of JBuilder for Linux, free for anyone to download, you can see that our effort was clearly targeted for this deadline. I said it before in this forum, when a commercial company makes plans for future products it needs reliable schedules and plans. We knew we couldn't ask this to an organization of volunteers and so we just decided to "roll our own" JDK. I believe there's nothing wrong with this, your patches are public and we were not the only ones that tried to apply them to 1.2.2. As today apology from Sun proves this has been just a PR mistake, nobody wanted to rob you of all the work you have done. As I said before the two JDKs evolved, from the common starting point of the 1.2 patches, in parallel. Witness is the different path taken in supporting some features : we tried the native threads approach and left it behind because the need for updated version of glibc. Other decisions where made in similar fashion. -- Paolo Ciccone JBuilder dev.team -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun/Inprise/GPL Linux JDK
Nelson, There are a number of possible scenarios that your comments could blossom into. Nelson Minar wrote: There are deeper problems lurking underneath, though, having to do with Sun's control of Java. Sun isn't interested in the ultimate goals of free software, and they're powerful enough to cause a lot of trouble with Java. We play a dangerous game in the free software world, using Java, hoping that we can trust Sun enough to not really screw people the way Microsoft has with their control of the Win32 API. The commercial world is playing the same game, too, and it's the root of so many of the schisms in the Java world. Here are some ideas: 1) Sun owns the Java trademark. They have published the VM spec and the language spec. They permit rogue ports from the specs. Idea: Maybe its time for another rogue port in open source form. This one should shoot for 1.3 from the git-go. 2) Another rogue port could be worked in under the Blackdown umbrella. I suspect that the Sun agreement prohibits the actual transmission of knowledge from the people who are the porters that have done so much for us so far. Idea: Couldn't the existing porters be instrumental in validating and ratifying a "Clean Room" rogue port of 1.3? 3) I used to set on a standards committee for telecom stuff. We were going to move our stuff into one of the standards bodies for standardization and I believe that occurred after I got a different job. Idea: There is no reason Sun has to be involved in the standardization of Java. Oops, I guess it would not be called Java it would be called something else but like ANSI C (XJ311 wasn't it?) once the standard is defined everyone will support the official standard. The product would have a note that says XK682 (or similar name) compliant. That's why I'm glad to see a big player like IBM also enter into the Java/Linux fray. The current ports are bound by Sun's lciense just like the rest, but IBM has enough muscle to push back if need be. 4) I think IBM understands that the fast growing Linux community is the perfect audience for their AIX products. After all Unix to Unix is far easier between the differences from one Unix to another versus the Unix to NT nightmare. When we (Linux users) need some heavy Iron those high end IBM RS6000/SP boxes rock and IBM wants the Linux community to think of them first. Idea: While IBM is trying to actually woo the Linux crowd Sun appears to be trying to tick us all off! Now who is more likely to sell big boxes to Linux users when we need them? IBM knows -- Tony Dean Linux: The choice of a GNU Generation!
Passing objects in jni
Hi there! First i would like to apologise about the newbie question but i couldnt find info about such topic. Is there a way to pass a Complex Object from java to legacy code using jni? Thanks in advance. Rodrigo Gidra
jdk 1.2.2rc3 segmentation fault, pt. 2
Please forgive me for the abruptness of my original message. I was rushing out the door when I sent it. What else other than my original email is needed to answer the question, "Why is javac segfaulting?" Typing "java" at the # prompt simply, and correctly, I think, dumps a list of command line options. Sincerely, Ron Johnson -- +--+ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | WWW : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +--+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sun/Inprise/GPL Linux JDK
Tony Dean wrote: > 1) Sun owns the Java trademark. They have published the VM spec and > the language spec. They permit rogue ports from the specs. There is already an excellent "rogue port" in the Kaffe project, although "cleanroom implementation" is a better term. Interestingly, even the spec carries some scary language... check out paragraph 6 of the copyright from the JVM spec, about the license to "practice this specification": http://java.sun.com/docs/books/vmspec/2nd-edition/html/Copyright.doc.html#997057 Nathan > > Nelson, > > There are a number of possible scenarios that your comments could > blossom into. > > Nelson Minar wrote: > > > > > There are deeper problems lurking underneath, though, having to do > > with Sun's control of Java. Sun isn't interested in the ultimate > > goals > > of free software, and they're powerful enough to cause a lot of > > trouble with Java. We play a dangerous game in the free software > > world, using Java, hoping that we can trust Sun enough to not really > > > > screw people the way Microsoft has with their control of the Win32 > > API. The commercial world is playing the same game, too, and it's > > the > > root of so many of the schisms in the Java world. > > Here are some ideas: > > 1) Sun owns the Java trademark. They have published the VM spec and > the language spec. They permit rogue ports from the specs. > > Idea: Maybe its time for another rogue port in open source form. > This one should > shoot for 1.3 from the git-go. > > 2) Another rogue port could be worked in under the Blackdown umbrella. > I suspect that > the Sun agreement prohibits the actual transmission of knowledge > from the people who > are the porters that have done so much for us so far. > > Idea: Couldn't the existing porters be instrumental in validating > and ratifying a > "Clean Room" rogue port of 1.3? > > > 3) I used to set on a standards committee for telecom stuff. We were > going to move > our stuff into one of the standards bodies for standardization and > I believe that > occurred after I got a different job. > > Idea: There is no reason Sun has to be involved in the > standardization of Java. Oops, > I guess it would not be called Java it would be called something > else but like ANSI C > (XJ311 wasn't it?) once the standard is defined everyone will > support the official > standard. The product would have a note that says XK682 (or > similar name) compliant. > > > That's why I'm glad to see a big player like IBM also enter into the > > > > Java/Linux fray. The current ports are bound by Sun's lciense just > > like the rest, but IBM has enough muscle to push back if need be. > > 4) I think IBM understands that the fast growing Linux community is > the perfect > audience for their AIX products. After all Unix to Unix is far > easier between > the differences from one Unix to another versus the Unix to > NT nightmare. When > we (Linux users) need some heavy Iron those high end IBM RS6000/SP > boxes rock > and IBM wants the Linux community to think of them first. > > Idea: While IBM is trying to actually woo the Linux crowd Sun > appears to be trying to > tick us all off! Now who is more likely to sell big boxes to Linux > users when we need them? > IBM knows > > -- > Tony Dean > Linux: The choice of a GNU Generation! > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JRE error when installing Oracle8i
Dear All, I'm using RedHat 6.1 (with GNOME). When I was trying to install Oracle8i (with doing ./runInstaller), I got the following message: "Initializing Java Virtual Machine from /usr/local/jre/bin/jre. Please wait Error in CreateOUIProcess():-1: Bad address" FYI, I've already installed JRE 1.1.6v5 in /usr/local/jre directory Does anyone have an idea? TIA, Bambang [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Font quality question
> Peter Schuller writes: >> Since I cannot currently use the Blackdown 1.2.2 RC3 release as >> it requires glibc 2.1.2 and I am currently stuck at 2.1.1, I >> decided to try the Imprise 1.2.2 RC1 JDK. The first thing I >> have noticed is that the font rendition is terrible compared to >> 1.1.8. The font is huge and ugly, no matter what font is >> selected. Does the same problem exist with the Blackdown port? Peter> Yes, at least on my box. Everything's just bigger on 1.2 Peter> for some reason. Yep, that's a known problem. 1.2.x wants to have TrueType fonts, XFree doesn't support that well yet. Also the bundled Lucida font isn't really nice. I've added a second font properties file to RC3. If you have the TT fonts Arial, Courier New and Times New Roman you can get a better display with this file. Juergen -- Juergen Kreileder, Blackdown Java-Linux Porting Team http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
