Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[James Le Cuirot]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 14:11:11 +
Roy Bamford  wrote:

> You can start with gcc-5.4 with the gcj use flag.
> That will bootstrap icedtea:7
> icedtea:7 will bootstrap icedtea:8
> Tested on arm64.
> 
> With icedtea:7 going and gcc-5.4 not having a very long future,
> building icedtea for a new arch will be painful. 

If someone wants icedtea on a new arch then I'll do whatever I can to
fudge a build together and create an icedtea-bin from it. It only has
to be done once for each arch. This is essentially what binary distros
do and given that this is good enough for Red Hat, they haven't spent
effort on making icedtea bootstrappable some other way like JamVM.

I think some choose the gcj route because they think it is purer but
this is not really true. There are precompiled binaries involved,
whichever route you take.

-- 
James Le Cuirot (chewi)
Gentoo Linux Developer


pgpI0jf0rTbGP.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

Eating spam for breakfast! Glorious Spam!
http://cdn.ipernity.com/142/50/59/32265059.4aebaf91.640.jpg
https://landof1words.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/sir-can-a-lot.jpg

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 09:59:15 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr."  wrote:
>
> That is also the main reason for Icedtea project existence beyond
> having a FOSS harness to build/boostrap OpenJDK/Java. Oracle JDK may
> only support certain archs. If you want to build on another, that is
> where Icedtea plays a role. Though again still have other issues,
> Hotspot, Zero, OpenJ9, legacy JamVM, etc. 

Ideally these are like USE flags, some are already for icedtea.

cacao, jamvm, and zero, in addition to default HotSpot.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines

No clue if icedtea/gnuandrew is looking to add support for OpenJ9. That
would likely be a big one since its from IBM, and the core to their JDK
for Power.

IBM also has a JDK, not packaged on Gentoo. Everyone already hates
Oracle so little interest in IBM. Ideally Gentoo should have it, though
not sure if it will continue on beyond 8. Maybe why they released J9.
It does support different archs.
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgp05SgGcZ0bA.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

Forgot something useful

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 09:50:51 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr."  wrote:
> 
> Otherwise yes, unless icedtea-bin exist for that arch. Boostrapping
> in a post gcc-jdk/java 7 world will be difficult, If not impossible
> for some archs.

That is also the main reason for Icedtea project existence beyond having
a FOSS harness to build/boostrap OpenJDK/Java. Oracle JDK may only
support certain archs. If you want to build on another, that is where
Icedtea plays a role. Though again still have other issues, Hotspot,
Zero, OpenJ9, legacy JamVM, etc. 

Me personally I wish Oracle/Sun had kept JRockit as an alternative as
well. It was merged into HotSpot. Or released with Hotspot in OpenJDK
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JRockit

Thus there is some reason for Icedtea project to exists beyond just
legal/licensing.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgpdnh0ALbobn.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 14:11:11 +
Roy Bamford  wrote:
>
> You can start with gcc-5.4 with the gcj use flag.
> That will bootstrap icedtea:7
> icedtea:7 will bootstrap icedtea:8
> Tested on arm64.

Your likely one of the few to do that :)

That is good one does not have to go back to 1.5, and 1.6.. Not bad to
get to 1.8, but once 9 is out. Not much fun going from 7 to 8 to 9.
No real reason to do that unless you want to. Or don't trust
Chewi/James icedtea-bin. He does like to spy :P j/k

The main reason for icedtea/openjdk vs oracle is to build openjdk or
java with open source licenses. I think if you build against oracle
your accepting oracles license for their JDK. It does not really taint
the result. But does mean java was built with non FOSS software. Oracle
JDK is downloaded under a different license agreement.
 
Its mostly a legal thing, and there is some slightly better system
integration. Definitely if building from source. Still some using
icedtea-bin, but thats a binary. So not sure as deps it was built
against change, etc. From source is likely different there.
Though I haven't really ever had issues with Oracle and system
integration. Occasionally people will have fonts issues. Fonts tends to
be one of the most noticeable visual difference between Oracle and
Icedtea/OpenJDK

I do not mess with openjdk/icedtea much if at all. I mostly run with
Oracle for various reasons. Licensing is not a concern. I am used to
Java long before it was FOSS.

> With icedtea:7 going and gcc-5.4 not having a very long future,
> building icedtea for a new arch will be painful. 

The main problem with arch support is HotSpot. There is not many
replacements for other archs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IcedTea#Platform_support

Not sure of OpenJ9 will change that. I think it will at min support
Power archs, ppc64 etc. Not sure about ppc 32bit.
 https://github.com/eclipse/openj9
https://github.com/ibmruntimes/openj9-openjdk-jdk9
https://bugs.gentoo.org/631156

Otherwise yes, unless icedtea-bin exist for that arch. Boostrapping
in a post gcc-jdk/java 7 world will be difficult, If not impossible for
some archs.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgpNM3IqwfZI6.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[Roy Bamford]

On 2017.11.18 04:16, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 02:40:14 +
> Peter Stuge  wrote:
> 
> > William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > > > If you have any suggestions as to what I should look at to
> better
> > > > understand the OpenJDK build system I would very much appreciate
> > > > them.  
> > ..
> > > Build OpenJDK stand alone. Get familiar with that.  
> > 
> > It used to be that one could not build OpenJDK without already
> having
> > a working JDK. Has that changed with OpenJDK 9 (IIRC it was planned
> > for OpenJDK 7 :) or not yet, and that is a reason for having icedtea
> > in the mix?
> 
> Yes you are correct, nothing has changed there to my knowledge.
> 
[snip]

> 
> -- 
> William L. Thomson Jr.
> 

You can start with gcc-5.4 with the gcj use flag.
That will bootstrap icedtea:7
icedtea:7 will bootstrap icedtea:8
Tested on arm64.

With icedtea:7 going and gcc-5.4 not having a very long future,
building icedtea for a new arch will be painful. 

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods


pgpgyRdsSikdz.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[R0b0t1]

Hello again friends,

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 11:30 AM, William L. Thomson Jr.
 wrote:
> Every bit contains useful technical information. Maybe make some effort
> to package or help JDK on Gentoo vs a pointless comment.
>

Thank you for the information. I hope it didn't seem like I was asking
you to hurry up and package OpenJDK or IcedTea. I apologize for not
being able to address some of the information you gave immediately, as
it is a lot of information.

If anyone is at fault, it is myself, for asking questions that
necessitated many answers. For this I apologize to the list. Please do
not ban me, friends. I am not very smart, and using my computer is
hard without help.

Respectfully,
 R0b0t1

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Sat, 18 Nov 2017 02:40:14 +
Peter Stuge  wrote:

> William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > > If you have any suggestions as to what I should look at to better
> > > understand the OpenJDK build system I would very much appreciate
> > > them.  
> ..
> > Build OpenJDK stand alone. Get familiar with that.  
> 
> It used to be that one could not build OpenJDK without already having
> a working JDK. Has that changed with OpenJDK 9 (IIRC it was planned
> for OpenJDK 7 :) or not yet, and that is a reason for having icedtea
> in the mix?

Yes you are correct, nothing has changed there to my knowledge.

It has to bootstrap itself. No one goes all the way back to the
classpath 1.5 days, and boostraps up from pure source.
Build 1.5, then 1.6, then 1.7, then 1.8, etc...

Everyone at this point starts with some version of a working JDK
binary. Once icedtea-bins are were, those were used to build icedtea
from source.

If you want say icedtea you will see it pull in icedtea-bin. If you
want the latest, it will pull in the version older unless a -bin of the
latest exists. Which comes from  a working from source ebuild.
https://github.com/gentoo/java-overlay/blob/master/dev-java/icedtea/icedtea-3.7.0_pre00.ebuild#L139

Ideally there is also an openjdk ebuild that would build with either
icedtea-bin, or oracle-jdk-bin. Or could always add a open-jdk-bin like
the oracle one, and use it to build openjdk ebuild.

That is very complex. Even the icedtea from source ebuild is non
trivial. The only one who does major work there is the Icedtea author.
Which Gentoo luckily benefits from directly, but is not the intention.
That is their job at RedHat.

gnu_andrew in #gentoo-java (but please do not just bug him hes busy!)
https://www.linkedin.com/in/gnuandrew
https://github.com/gentoo/java-overlay/commits?author=gnu-andrew


-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgpsEwKZXtTk7.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[Peter Stuge]

William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> > If you have any suggestions as to what I should look at to better
> > understand the OpenJDK build system I would very much appreciate
> > them.
..
> Build OpenJDK stand alone. Get familiar with that.

It used to be that one could not build OpenJDK without already having a
working JDK. Has that changed with OpenJDK 9 (IIRC it was planned for
OpenJDK 7 :) or not yet, and that is a reason for having icedtea in the mix?


//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:41:53 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr."  wrote:

> On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:42:59 -0600
> Matthew Thode  wrote:
> >
> > You seem to know a bit about this, has there been a bug made
> > outlining the troubles we will encounter as you know them?  
> 
> No

A user did file a bug for Java 9. Which the response they received from
Gentoo discouraged them and they closed it. Nice
 https://bugs.gentoo.org/634698

IMHO no way to respond to a user. Their reaction is the exact reason
why. When others showed in #gentoo-java asking about 9. I first stated
I guess no one cares since no bug has been filed. To my surprise one
was, and it was closed due a rude response from Gentoo. They could have
not commented at all Bug would have remained open. Doubt that users
will return... Much less help out etc.

My response and attitude is because the only reason Java 9 was not in
tree zero day release, is because of Gentoo itself.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/634698#c5

I would have had it in log ago and maintained since. Much less discover
all the issues I am now and fixing them in tree vs overlay.
 Dec 5, 2016
https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/commit/f90d8b21c39dbe8684e0951b845c43fae2ba6cfc#diff-0ecef02a46ed32d29b482614d71d229f
https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/commits/master/dev-java/oracle-jdk-bin

Go GENTOO!

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgp7CKzVK3m2k.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 12:07:23 -0500
NP-Hardass  wrote:

> Oh come on!
> 
> Triple posting to the ML?
> 
> Do we really need to have another discussion about not being spammy...
> Please... Think before you post...

Yes you should think before you post!

Every bit contains useful technical information. Maybe make some effort
to package or help JDK on Gentoo vs a pointless comment.

Like you said, THINK!

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgpNG4RcFvy0f.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[NP-Hardass]

On 11/17/2017 04:15 AM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 03:24:47 -0500
> "William L. Thomson Jr."  wrote:
>>
>> The icedtea from source ebuild is a result of RedHat. The main person
>> at RedHat responsible for their open source Java is the author of
>> Icedtea. He uses Gentoo as his development/test platform. Gentoo
>> usually will have that at least the same time as others, if not before
>> all others.
>>
>> If it was not for him, and RedHat paying him. I doubt Gentoo would
>> have from source Java. Not to discount Chewi/James efforts. But the
>> author of Icedtea is the one maintaining that in java-overlay.
> 
> Something to keep in mind. Part of why Icedtea lags like with Java 9.
> The Icedtea author as part of their role at RedHat is responsible for
> older versions as well. Much of their time is consumed in dealing with
> older. Thus the latest does not always get as much time, or 100%.
> 
> Next month 1.6 ends, but with 9 out not sure it helps. Still has 1.7
> and 1.8 for some time to come. They have to maintain 3 versions...
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013
> 

Oh come on!

Triple posting to the ML?

Do we really need to have another discussion about not being spammy...
Please... Think before you post...

-- 
NP-Hardass



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 03:24:47 -0500
"William L. Thomson Jr."  wrote:
>
> The icedtea from source ebuild is a result of RedHat. The main person
> at RedHat responsible for their open source Java is the author of
> Icedtea. He uses Gentoo as his development/test platform. Gentoo
> usually will have that at least the same time as others, if not before
> all others.
> 
> If it was not for him, and RedHat paying him. I doubt Gentoo would
> have from source Java. Not to discount Chewi/James efforts. But the
> author of Icedtea is the one maintaining that in java-overlay.

Something to keep in mind. Part of why Icedtea lags like with Java 9.
The Icedtea author as part of their role at RedHat is responsible for
older versions as well. Much of their time is consumed in dealing with
older. Thus the latest does not always get as much time, or 100%.

Next month 1.6 ends, but with 9 out not sure it helps. Still has 1.7
and 1.8 for some time to come. They have to maintain 3 versions...
https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgp_rJ43UR3hN.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

To really get crazy, another thing Gentoo likely won't see unless
someone steps up. OpenJ9  alternative to HotSpot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenJ9
https://github.com/ibmruntimes/openj9-openjdk-jdk9
https://www.slideshare.net/DanHeidinga/j9-under-the-hood-of-the-next-open-source-jvm

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgpi7ZGgRFiQs.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 01:23:58 -0600
R0b0t1  wrote:
> 
> I am confused. I was aware that IcedTea was a build system, but I am
> not aware as to how Ubuntu packaged OpenJDK 9.

Not sure without looking, but likely just shipping the binary of OpenJDK
http://download.java.net/java/GA/jdk9/9.0.1/binaries/openjdk-9.0.1_linux-x64_bin.tar.gz

Basically oracle, less branding, etc. Could copy over oracle-jdk-bin,
and likely use those sources. Maybe not sure. Never messed with them.

 > I expect the releases to lag, which is why I had been using Oracle's
> JDK. Can you explain why there is an IcedTea ebuild but not an OpenJDK
> ebuild?

Yes, in short, no one cares about Java on Gentoo.

The icedtea from source ebuild is a result of RedHat. The main person
at RedHat responsible for their open source Java is the author of
Icedtea. He uses Gentoo as his development/test platform. Gentoo
usually will have that at least the same time as others, if not before
all others.

If it was not for him, and RedHat paying him. I doubt Gentoo would have
from source Java. Not to discount Chewi/James efforts. But the author
of Icedtea is the one maintaining that in java-overlay.

No one has interest in Java other than expecting others to make things
available for them in Gentoo. Or preventing others from doing such.
It has been this way for close a decade.

> > Also icedtea on Gentoo does not have OpenJavaFX. I am not
> > sure any distro has OpenJavaFX packaged. I am not aware of any
> > ebuilds ever for that. Probably be me someday if I ever have
> > interest. Which can bind many to oracle for JavaFX. Which includes
> > myself. 
> 
> OpenJDK now contains an implementation of JavaFX. 

The openjdk binary above may contain that. The OpenJDK project is not
the same as OpenJFX project. I am very aware of it all.

Icedtea on Gentoo has no support for OpenJFX. There is no ebuild to my
knowledge anywhere. Not that I have looked much.

> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/openjfx/

That is the OpenJFX project. It is a separate package.

> Debian and Ubuntu
> have it packaged. For general instructions, see the following:
> 
> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/OpenJFX/Building+OpenJFX

You or anyone is welcome to create a Gentoo ebuild for that. To date no
one has. I am not to interested in doing what others are not. I do
enough of that regarding Gentoo Java...

> Packages:
> 
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/openjfx
> https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/openjfx

That does not seem like part of OpenJDK if they are separate packages.
I am not sure I am not following what is going on there. It does not
really help or have any effect. They are making and shipping binaries.
That is considerably easier than a from source package.

> I have recently been interested in JavaFX. It is far more user
> friendly. Many open source applications still target Swing however, to
> be compatible with old OpenJDK releases.

I have done Swing for over a decade, and JavaFX is rather nice.
Transition from one to the other is fairly straight forward. It will
take some time for things to completely move off Swing. Even my own
stuff is partial. Though I haven't been working on that for sometime.
 
> My response to this is the same as above: Can you explain why the
> Gentoo build system is the way it is? If you have any suggestions as
> to what I should look at to better understand the OpenJDK build system
> I would very much appreciate them.

Look at icedtea ebuild, not the -bin the from source. Build OpenJDK
stand alone. Get familiar with that. Learn ebuilds. Connect all
together. It is not trivial.
 
> At a certain point, would it make sense to drop old packages and not
> bother to update them? 

I try hard to only keep the latest of any version around, and ideally
one slot. Many times I will modify upstream code. At times I
will submit patches/PRs. Other times just do what I need to in ebuild.
In a few case I became the upstream and took over the project to update
to current dependencies, tag, etc.

> This seems to have helped with the stabilization of Python 3.5, and
> Python 3.6 looks like it will go the same direction. Hopefully this
> will occur for Java 9.

I do not bother with stabilization. 

icedtea:8 is NOT stable now, only icedtea-bin which Chewi/James makes
from icedtea from source package. For Java 9 to be stable there has to
be a stable version of icedtea:9.

I battled with Chewi/James over this back when 1.8 came out. People
complained about having Oracle forced on them. With it being the only
option, till an icedtea package was available. Basically the whole
thing gets slowed down due to icedtea.

Having a openjdk-bin package may help there. But that is not really
ideally. Why not make Gentoo a binary distro? oracle-jdk-bin is one
thing. But that there are sources for OpenJDK. Having a -bin is not
really ideal. Just lazy option.

> If I understand correctly, it is possible to install the JDK but not
> set it to system VM? It is not 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[R0b0t1]

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:30 AM, William L. Thomson Jr.
 wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:38:09 -0600
> R0b0t1  wrote:
>>
>> Hopefully this is not a tangent, but the OpenJDK release is available
>> on Ubuntu. I have tried to understand the IcedTea build process and
>> failed, as I was hoping that it could be packaged for Gentoo before
>> the official IcedTea release. I was not able to find a timeline from
>> the OpenJDK project.
>
> Gentoo is a from source distro not binary. It will be some time before
> icedtea, some version support slot 9 will be available. There is no eta
> for icedtea. That comes from directly from RedHat. The person who
> makes it for the world does so on Gentoo, for RedHat their employer.
>

I am confused. I was aware that IcedTea was a build system, but I am
not aware as to how Ubuntu packaged OpenJDK 9.

In the context of Gentoo I meant "packaged" as in "created an ebuild
for," which is not proper language.

> I tried for years to get others to make a path for them to be able to
> become a dev and work in tree. Rather that work goes into java-overlay
> and is proxied to tree by Chewi/James.
> https://github.com/gentoo/java-overlay/tree/master/dev-java/icedtea
>

Though I am not a developer, this concerns me in other areas too. Many
developers do not produce extremely high quality code, but this
concern is cited as exactly the reason for keeping developership
exclusive. Projects I feel I should mention include genkernel and
crossdev. I had to temporarily give up my personal interests that
relied on them and have since begun rewriting them. In the small bit I
have done understanding crossdev, it has become apparent to me that
the authors did not reference the GCC build system documentation very
well. Of course, it may be the case that no one refers to it.

>> You focus on Oracle's Java?
>
> Yes, in brief, as the other will always lag. I would be some what
> interested in a actual OpenJDK package. That could build with either
> oracle or icedtea. Usually for production and business purposes people
> want to run Oracle. I do not know many who run icedtea/openjdk. Though
> I am sure they are out there. Definitely RedHat customers.
>

I expect the releases to lag, which is why I had been using Oracle's
JDK. Can you explain why there is an IcedTea ebuild but not an OpenJDK
ebuild?

> Also icedtea on Gentoo does not have OpenJavaFX. I am not
> sure any distro has OpenJavaFX packaged. I am not aware of any ebuilds
> ever for that. Probably be me someday if I ever have interest. Which
> can bind many to oracle for JavaFX. Which includes myself.
>

OpenJDK now contains an implementation of JavaFX. Debian and Ubuntu
have it packaged. For general instructions, see the following:

http://openjdk.java.net/projects/openjfx/
https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/OpenJFX/Building+OpenJFX

Packages:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/openjfx
https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/openjfx

I have recently been interested in JavaFX. It is far more user
friendly. Many open source applications still target Swing however, to
be compatible with old OpenJDK releases.

> Icedtea really is not a jdk but a build system. On Gentoo only it
> becomes the name of the JDK/JRE. It really is just OpenJDK built
> without Oracle. Ideally there is oracle, openjdk, and icedtea ebuilds.
> You then build openjdk with oracle or icedtea via USE flag.
>
> Icedtea will always lag from Oracle. There will always be oracle
> binaries before others. Yes you can build the source against it, but no
> one is working on that. Again Gentoo has what it does because of
> RedHat. Really for RedHats own interest, not Gentoo. Gentoo just
> benefits.
>
> It would likely be a considerable effort to have a openjdk that can
> build via oracle or icedtea/openjdk binaries. I think exherbo managed
> that, I am not sure.
>

My response to this is the same as above: Can you explain why the
Gentoo build system is the way it is? If you have any suggestions as
to what I should look at to better understand the OpenJDK build system
I would very much appreciate them.

> The lagging may get worse as JDK release is scheduled to speed up
> considerably come March. Say hello to Java 18.3
> https://mreinhold.org/blog/forward-faster
>
>> The Oracle binaries seem to work well for me and I have experienced no
>> issues. Notably, Scala works transparently on the Oracle JDK 9. What
>> kind of issues are you seeing? The biggest issue I have had is that
>> some version tests do not parse "9" the same way as "1.8.0_152".
>
> There are tons of build issues for Java packages in tree. From not
> supporting < 1.6 source/target, The whole modules system. Changes with
> class visibility and deprecation of sun.* classes. No tools.jar. Odd
> build issues where some packages build fine under 1.8, but generate
> errors under 9 that require code fixes.
>
> A slew of issues that Gentoo already lacks man power to keep some stuff
> current. The 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 23:38:09 -0600
R0b0t1  wrote:
>
> Hopefully this is not a tangent, but the OpenJDK release is available
> on Ubuntu. I have tried to understand the IcedTea build process and
> failed, as I was hoping that it could be packaged for Gentoo before
> the official IcedTea release. I was not able to find a timeline from
> the OpenJDK project.

Gentoo is a from source distro not binary. It will be some time before
icedtea, some version support slot 9 will be available. There is no eta
for icedtea. That comes from directly from RedHat. The person who
makes it for the world does so on Gentoo, for RedHat their employer.

I tried for years to get others to make a path for them to be able to
become a dev and work in tree. Rather that work goes into java-overlay
and is proxied to tree by Chewi/James.
https://github.com/gentoo/java-overlay/tree/master/dev-java/icedtea

> You focus on Oracle's Java?

Yes, in brief, as the other will always lag. I would be some what
interested in a actual OpenJDK package. That could build with either
oracle or icedtea. Usually for production and business purposes people
want to run Oracle. I do not know many who run icedtea/openjdk. Though
I am sure they are out there. Definitely RedHat customers.

Also icedtea on Gentoo does not have OpenJavaFX. I am not
sure any distro has OpenJavaFX packaged. I am not aware of any ebuilds
ever for that. Probably be me someday if I ever have interest. Which
can bind many to oracle for JavaFX. Which includes myself.

Icedtea really is not a jdk but a build system. On Gentoo only it
becomes the name of the JDK/JRE. It really is just OpenJDK built
without Oracle. Ideally there is oracle, openjdk, and icedtea ebuilds.
You then build openjdk with oracle or icedtea via USE flag.

Icedtea will always lag from Oracle. There will always be oracle
binaries before others. Yes you can build the source against it, but no
one is working on that. Again Gentoo has what it does because of
RedHat. Really for RedHats own interest, not Gentoo. Gentoo just
benefits.

It would likely be a considerable effort to have a openjdk that can
build via oracle or icedtea/openjdk binaries. I think exherbo managed
that, I am not sure.

The lagging may get worse as JDK release is scheduled to speed up
considerably come March. Say hello to Java 18.3 
https://mreinhold.org/blog/forward-faster

> The Oracle binaries seem to work well for me and I have experienced no
> issues. Notably, Scala works transparently on the Oracle JDK 9. What
> kind of issues are you seeing? The biggest issue I have had is that
> some version tests do not parse "9" the same way as "1.8.0_152".

There are tons of build issues for Java packages in tree. From not
supporting < 1.6 source/target, The whole modules system. Changes with
class visibility and deprecation of sun.* classes. No tools.jar. Odd
build issues where some packages build fine under 1.8, but generate
errors under 9 that require code fixes.

A slew of issues that Gentoo already lacks man power to keep some stuff
current. The amount of work is pretty tremendous on top of the state of
the tree.

Out of some 160 packages I had installed, 48 failed, with some 600+ to
test still. There were more failures before some fixes. I am still
working on fixing those and there are likely a considerable amount
more. 

My overlay is already ahead of the tree in many ways. The tree has to
play additional catchup. The tree itself without my overlay may have may
more issues. I do not know. I am working on replacing all packages in
tree, not running them. I need them kept current.

> Adding Java 9 to the tree would help users who are interested
> experiment with the language.

The JDK/JRE could go into tree masked for anyone who wants to unmask. I
have been pushing for that for some time, but will only happen when
Chewi/James has time.

JRE is safer than JDK. There will be issues with JDK if set to system
VM and used to build Java packages on Gentoo. The mask should warn
about such, etc.

> As part of the first work on Python 3.5
> (very minor) I installed it on my system but did not add it to
> PYTHON_TARGETS. Is there an equivalent for Java?

Heck no, Java is not in my opinion an pain like Ruby and Python. Perl
is not either. In fact if I get time to re-write eclasses. I plan to
move the versions from in ebuilds to eclass. Making 1 place to update
source/target/release of a java package.

Right now Java is controlled via depends. The DEPEND version sets the
-source, and RDEPEND the -target version. Java 9 has a new -release.
The source/target has  long time issue on Gentoo. To trigger you build
with newer and run with older.
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Java_Developer_Guide#Bootstrap_class_path


> I have read the bug discussing your retirement. It is not possible for
> me to ascertain what led to disciplinary action. The lack of concrete
> discussion on behavior to be addressed reflects poorly on those who
> sought 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[R0b0t1]

Hello friends!

I am excited about Java 9. However, I am a very excitable person.

Hopefully this is not a tangent, but the OpenJDK release is available
on Ubuntu. I have tried to understand the IcedTea build process and
failed, as I was hoping that it could be packaged for Gentoo before
the official IcedTea release. I was not able to find a timeline from
the OpenJDK project.

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 10:41 PM, William L. Thomson Jr.
 wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:42:59 -0600
> Matthew Thode  wrote:
>>
>> You seem to know a bit about this, has there been a bug made outlining
>> the troubles we will encounter as you know them?
>
> No, I feel I am already doing more than I should to help given my past
> treatment. I have been making most issues with potential resolutions
> know in #gentoo-java for the past ~48 hours. I have been spending
> most time fixing stuff in my overlay. As I have been for over a year.
> https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo
>

You focus on Oracle's Java?

>>  It's nice to have a warning, but sounding alarmist without concrete
>> help doesn't actually help all that much.
>
> People have been asking in #gentoo-java about Java 9. I was simply
> letting everyone know it would be some time before that is likely to be
> the case. That alone was a courtesy to others.
>
> It does not take much to find out there are considerable issues with
> Java 9 from most any web search. For anyone who cares, most do not.
> Thus the present state of Java on Gentoo. Which I have brought up many
> times over the past years. A new major version taking some time should
> not be of surprise to anyone given that fact.
>

The Oracle binaries seem to work well for me and I have experienced no
issues. Notably, Scala works transparently on the Oracle JDK 9. What
kind of issues are you seeing? The biggest issue I have had is that
some version tests do not parse "9" the same way as "1.8.0_152".

Adding Java 9 to the tree would help users who are interested
experiment with the language. As part of the first work on Python 3.5
(very minor) I installed it on my system but did not add it to
PYTHON_TARGETS. Is there an equivalent for Java?

> If you recall I got banned from Github over commenting on Java 9 early
> access PR. I have also commented on another since.
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/1721
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/6033
>
> You can see the history of jdk 9 I put in my overlay almost a year ago.
> That could have been in Gentoo. I maintained EA builds till release...
> Dec 5, 2016
> https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/commit/f90d8b21c39dbe8684e0951b845c43fae2ba6cfc#diff-0ecef02a46ed32d29b482614d71d229f
> https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/commits/master/dev-java/oracle-jdk-bin
>

That looks promising, thank you.

> I have done all I can. This is the visible result of blocking people,
> with no one else wiling to do the work. I am playing catch up now.
>

I have read the bug discussing your retirement. It is not possible for
me to ascertain what led to disciplinary action. The lack of concrete
discussion on behavior to be addressed reflects poorly on those who
sought disciplinary action.

However, I am not a very smart man. I am usually wrong. Hopefully
someone who is much more intelligent than I can explain how I have
erred in my opinion.

Respectfully,
 R0b0t1.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:42:59 -0600
Matthew Thode  wrote:
>
> You seem to know a bit about this, has there been a bug made outlining
> the troubles we will encounter as you know them?

No, I feel I am already doing more than I should to help given my past
treatment. I have been making most issues with potential resolutions
know in #gentoo-java for the past ~48 hours. I have been spending
most time fixing stuff in my overlay. As I have been for over a year.
https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo

>  It's nice to have a warning, but sounding alarmist without concrete
> help doesn't actually help all that much.

People have been asking in #gentoo-java about Java 9. I was simply
letting everyone know it would be some time before that is likely to be
the case. That alone was a courtesy to others.

It does not take much to find out there are considerable issues with
Java 9 from most any web search. For anyone who cares, most do not.
Thus the present state of Java on Gentoo. Which I have brought up many
times over the past years. A new major version taking some time should
not be of surprise to anyone given that fact.

If you recall I got banned from Github over commenting on Java 9 early
access PR. I have also commented on another since.
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/1721
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/6033

You can see the history of jdk 9 I put in my overlay almost a year ago.
That could have been in Gentoo. I maintained EA builds till release...
Dec 5, 2016
https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/commit/f90d8b21c39dbe8684e0951b845c43fae2ba6cfc#diff-0ecef02a46ed32d29b482614d71d229f
https://github.com/Obsidian-StudiosInc/os-xtoo/commits/master/dev-java/oracle-jdk-bin

I have done all I can. This is the visible result of blocking people,
with no one else wiling to do the work. I am playing catch up now.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.


pgpDnE5BlR_1f.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Java 9 on Gentoo

[Matthew Thode]

On 17-11-16 15:17:15, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> Just as a heads up, pass it along. For anyone interested. It will be
> some time before Java 9 is available on Gentoo. It will take
> considerable work to get it unmasked and safe for use.
> 
> Once in tree masked, it will likely be very painful for anyone who does
> unmask. You have been forewarned!!!
> 
> NOT FUD!
> Constructive heads up as to the factual state of things. If
> you would like to see them change. Talk to Chewi/James Le Cuirot. He
> will need lots of help! Even with others I guestimate a month or more
> before it can be unmasked. Once its added to tree...
> 
> -- 
> William L. Thomson Jr.

You seem to know a bit about this, has there been a bug made outlining
the troubles we will encounter as you know them?  It's nice to have a
warning, but sounding alarmist without concrete help doesn't actually
help all that much.

-- 
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature