Matej Cepl <mcepl@...> writes:

>
> Hi,
>
> I was trying once already to use blueMarine image cataloging
> program with IcedTea (which was then still too raw;
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.java/2311). Now
> when the OpenJDK was officially certified to be a Java, I tried
> again, and I wasn't that much successfull either. Could anyboyd
> who actually understands Java and Fedora, could join a thread on
> http://bluemarine.tidalwave.it/forum/posts/list/1179.page and
> something useful there, please?
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Matěj
>
>

The first bug I was talking of has been fixed, but another has been detected
later in the boot sequence. I've create an "umbrella issue" for all bugs related
with OpenJDK here:

http://bluemarine-old.tidalwave.it/issues/browse/BM-671


--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

I've just released a snapshot that seems to start and generally work with
OpenJDK (but I didn't run all the tests available), even though there are
problems. Please refer to the post in blueMarine users' forum for further
information: http://bluemarine.tidalwave.it/forum/posts/list/1184.page



--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Hi Fabrizio,

On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 07:43 +0000, Fabrizio Giudici wrote:
> I've just released a snapshot that seems to start and generally work with
> OpenJDK (but I didn't run all the tests available), even though there are
> problems. Please refer to the post in blueMarine users' forum for further
> information: http://bluemarine.tidalwave.it/forum/posts/list/1184.page

Thanks so much for making sure bleumarine works out of the box with
icedtea/openjdk! I looked at the above posting and also found you blog
at:
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici/archive/2008/08/still_problems.html

That last one confused me a little. Because that issue should have been
fixed months ago:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/2008-April/001806.html

What version of fedora icedtea/openjdk are you using?
$ java -version
$ rpm -q java-1.6.0-openjdk
should give you the exact version strings.

Thanks,

Mark

--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Mark Wielaard <mark@...> writes:

>
> Hi Fabrizio,
>
> On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 07:43 +0000, Fabrizio Giudici wrote:
> > I've just released a snapshot that seems to start and generally work with
> > OpenJDK (but I didn't run all the tests available), even though there are
> > problems. Please refer to the post in blueMarine users' forum for further
> > information: http://bluemarine.tidalwave.it/forum/posts/list/1184.page
>
> Thanks so much for making sure bleumarine works out of the box with
> icedtea/openjdk! I looked at the above posting and also found you blog
> at:
> http://weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici/archive/2008/08/still_problems.html
>
> That last one confused me a little. Because that issue should have been
> fixed months ago:
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/2008-April/001806.html
>
> What version of fedora icedtea/openjdk are you using?
> $ java -version
> $ rpm -q java-1.6.0-openjdk
> should give you the exact version strings.

Thank you very much for following up, Mark. I'm using OpenJDK build 1.6.0-b09 -
unfortunately I can't tell which is the output of rpm since I'm testing openjdk
with Ubuntu - I don't have a Fedora box at hand right now.

I was confused too as I saw that one of the bugs has been fixed time ago - I
suspect it could be a similar bug, but slightly different. I'm working to get a
stack trace and post to the issue list at launchpad.

May I ask another thing? I've also run a few performance benchmarks side-by-side
with Sun's JDK 6 on Ubuntu, and OpenJDK seems to be really really slower, at the
point that I think I'm doing something wrong. I'll post in a few hours my
findings on my blog, but in the meantime is there anything I should know, such
as special command line switches etc? AFAIK OpenJDK runs the same HotSpot
compiler than Sun's JDK 6, or am I wrong?

Thanks.


--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Hi Fabrizio,

On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 16:46 +0000, Fabrizio Giudici wrote:
> Thank you very much for following up, Mark. I'm using OpenJDK build 1.6.0-b09 -
> unfortunately I can't tell which is the output of rpm since I'm testing openjdk
> with Ubuntu - I don't have a Fedora box at hand right now.

OK, that explains things. Ubuntu clearly packaged a really old
icedtea/openjdk version. I thought you were using Fedora since you said
"Since OpenJDK passed the Test Compatibility Kit (TCK), this means that
some parts of imaging elaboration are not covered by it - and I'm really
puzzled about that" and only the binary version shipped with Fedora 9
has ever passed the TCK (this is indeed a problem, the TCK is
proprietary and not available to the community at large except under
NDA, which indeed means you cannot in general rely on any openjdk
derivative to having passed the TCK... sigh).

> I was confused too as I saw that one of the bugs has been fixed time ago - I
> suspect it could be a similar bug, but slightly different. I'm working to get a
> stack trace and post to the issue list at launchpad.

I am pretty sure it is that old issue. b09 is just really, really old
(April 2008). And the patch that added the new color profile support was
added after it was released. Current icedtea/openjdk is 1.2+hg/b11,
although fedora actually packages a slightly newer version (we should
release 1.3 for real I guess). The 1.2/b10 version was the version that
formally passed the TCK on x86/x86_64 fedora 9.

> May I ask another thing? I've also run a few performance benchmarks side-by-side
> with Sun's JDK 6 on Ubuntu, and OpenJDK seems to be really really slower, at the
> point that I think I'm doing something wrong. I'll post in a few hours my
> findings on my blog, but in the meantime is there anything I should know, such
> as special command line switches etc? AFAIK OpenJDK runs the same HotSpot
> compiler than Sun's JDK 6, or am I wrong?

I don't know if anybody did any benchmarks to compare the two. They
should not really differ noticeably in terms of speed, since the
underlying code is almost similar. But till now we have been focused on
completeness and correctness. If someone has repeatable benchmarks that
show icedtea/openjdk being really slow that would be interesting.

Cheers,

Mark

--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Hi,

On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 21:22 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > I was confused too as I saw that one of the bugs has been fixed time ago - I
> > suspect it could be a similar bug, but slightly different. I'm working to get a
> > stack trace and post to the issue list at launchpad.
>
> I am pretty sure it is that old issue. b09 is just really, really old
> (April 2008). And the patch that added the new color profile support was
> added after it was released. Current icedtea/openjdk is 1.2+hg/b11,
> although fedora actually packages a slightly newer version (we should
> release 1.3 for real I guess). The 1.2/b10 version was the version that
> formally passed the TCK on x86/x86_64 fedora 9.

Actually that is wrong, the binary rpm that passed the TCK was
java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.0-0.15.b09.fc9.x86_64 (and the x86
variant). So "b09" without the actual icedtea revision number doesn't
tell the whole story unfortunately. We should probably try to make the
distributions include the icedtea patch level since we do include lots
of bug fixes and extra compatibility fixes on top of the bare openjdk
bxx drops.

Cheers,

Mark

--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense. Actually I didn't think about
different bits in different distros if the package name is the same. Yep, I
think that if possible the package name should contain as much information about
the version as possible.

Tomorrow I'll try to download Fedora and install it onto an external drive - but
I think it should be possible to get the .rpm and repackage it to .deb, so I can
install it on Ubuntu (for a few weeks I'm with a mobile connection, fast enough
for normal working, but not the best for downloading whole CD/DVDs). Can you
tell me where can I download the .rpm?

BTW, the performance differences I'm seeing is 2x-6x in slowness - I believe it
could be the same problem, if they packaged maybe some old VM with Hotspot only
partially enabled.

--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Hi Fabrizio,

> Tomorrow I'll try to download Fedora and install it onto an external drive - but
> I think it should be possible to get the .rpm and repackage it to .deb, so I can
> install it on Ubuntu (for a few weeks I'm with a mobile connection, fast enough
> for normal working, but not the best for downloading whole CD/DVDs). Can you
> tell me where can I download the .rpm?

The very latest rpms can always be found through the koji build system:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=5920
(Note that some of these are really pretty new/cutting-edge)

Debian (and I assume Ubuntu) comes with alien to convert packages.
But I am pretty sure there must be newer packages also available for
Debian (which hopefully can also be installed on derivatives like
Ubuntu): http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=openjdk
(Not that I would want to discourage you from trying out Fedora, which
is probably the GNU/Linux distro that is most tuned and up to date for
libre-java. http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora )

> BTW, the performance differences I'm seeing is 2x-6x in slowness - I believe it
> could be the same problem, if they packaged maybe some old VM with Hotspot only
> partially enabled.

Wow, that is a huge slowdown. Unless it is some micro-benchmark that
cannot easily be explained away with old/newer Hotspot for sure. We
definitely need to investigate that. If you could post something to
easily reproduce it that would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Mark

--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Quick follow-up: I'm trying to grab a Fedora installation DVD. In the meantine,
a guy from JUG Genova was kind enough to try the blueMarine latest snapshot, and
the problem seems not to be there, as you predicted (I'm just waiting to see the
logs to have a confirmation). I'm trying today to close first this issue of
mine; then I'll move on the benchmark stuff. In any case I can anticipate that
the benchmark is completely open source in code and data, I'd just like to write
some more information about how to run it (and maybe trying to reduce as much as
possible the amount of code to download). See you later.

PS I anticipate some unofficial numbers, hoping that the table format is not
screwed out:

Linux Ubuntu 8.0.4
W Java 1.6.0_06 OpenJDK 1.6.0b9 Java 1.5.0_15
1 0.38 0.28 1.93 0.76 0.44 0.38
2 0.35 0.22 1.44 0.49 0.37 0.33
3 0.34 0.24 1.32 0.58 0.41 0.33
4 0.40 0.25 1.31 0.62 0.41 0.36


These number refers to tests run on the same hardware; the lower the numberm,
the faster the benchmark; three JDKs tested, a pair of numbers for each JDK: the
former for -client, the latter for -server; W means "number of workers" (the
test can be run in parallel, even though tests with 3 and 4 workers are not
meaningful as I'm running on a dual core). You see that where Sun's Java makes
0.38, OpenJDK makes 1.93 (yikes!); with -server the numbers are 0.28 and 0.76
(better, but still 2.5x).

--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list

Mark Wielaard wrote:

Hi Fabrizio,


Tomorrow I'll try to download Fedora and install it onto an external drive - but
I think it should be possible to get the .rpm and repackage it to .deb, so I can
install it on Ubuntu (for a few weeks I'm with a mobile connection, fast enough
for normal working, but not the best for downloading whole CD/DVDs). Can you
tell me where can I download the .rpm?


The very latest rpms can always be found through the koji build system:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=5920
(Note that some of these are really pretty new/cutting-edge)


I just tried these RPMs with OpenNMS on fc9 and I get this error:


PropertyAccessException 1: org.springframework.beans.TypeMismatchException: Failed to convert property value of type [java.lang.String] to required type [org.opennms.netmgt.statsd.RelativeTime] for property 'relativeTime'; nested exception is java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Unsupported value: YESTERDAY
at org.springframework.beans.AbstractPropertyAccessor .setPropertyValues(AbstractPropertyAccessor.java:1 04)
at org.springframework.beans.AbstractPropertyAccessor .setPropertyValues(AbstractPropertyAccessor.java:5 9)
at org.springframework.beans.AbstractPropertyAccessor .setPropertyValues(AbstractPropertyAccessor.java:5 5)
at org.opennms.netmgt.statsd.ReportDefinitionBuilder. buildReportDefinitions(ReportDefinitionBuilder.jav a:83)
at org.opennms.netmgt.statsd.Statsd.start(Statsd.java :70)
at org.opennms.netmgt.daemon.AbstractSpringContextJmx ServiceDaemon.start(AbstractSpringContextJmxServic eDaemon.java:91)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Nativ e Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Native MethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(De legatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616)
at com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.StandardMBeanIntrospector. invokeM2(StandardMBeanIntrospector.java:111)
at com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.StandardMBeanIntrospector. invokeM2(StandardMBeanIntrospector.java:45)
at com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.MBeanIntrospector.invokeM( MBeanIntrospector.java:226)
at com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.PerInterface.invoke(PerInt erface.java:138)
at com.sun.jmx.mbeanserver.MBeanSupport.invoke(MBeanS upport.java:251)
at com.sun.jmx.interceptor.DefaultMBeanServerIntercep tor.invoke(DefaultMBeanServerInterceptor.java:857)
... 13 more


...presumably there's some kind of esoteric date handling that is not
supported by openjdk yet...


What's the best way to open a bug on this? I tried going to the OpenJDK
site and couldn't figure out where to actually report issues.
"Contributing" talks about submitting code, but there's no link to an
issue tracker.


--
Benjamin Reed
The OpenNMS Group
http://www.opennms.org/


--
fedora-devel-java-list mailing list
fedora-devel-java-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list