FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-02-2008, 07:33 PM
"Colin Walters"
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version because it's
> developers have said so.

So what you're really saying is Fedora doesn't support Java < 6 very
well. I don't think anyone would disagree, but you have to understand
it's not a very interesting problem; these projects should really be
working to update for 6, regardless of Fedora or OpenJDK - Java 5 is
in pure maintenance mode now.

I'm sure there's a fair amount of software out there that doesn't work
on Java 6, but it's not "most" by a long shot.

> > It's been well known for years how to install the proprietary
> > JDK;
> >
>
> Well known by?

Really...it's in a lot of FAQs, etc.

> That would have been just fine, but there have been long intervals where
> jpackage has not had a suitable repo (and again, I don't see any reason that
> should even have needed to change across fedora versions since java code is
> pretty much independent of anything else)

Perhaps; I've personally only used the jpackage shims on RHEL (which
is much closer to jpackage's target audience).

> and in earlier conversations here
> I thought someone said the relationship was deliberately broken with
> portions moved into fedora packages and the rest ignored.

If Fedora and JPackage were on Facebook, the relationship status would
be "It's complicated". But we are cooperating on many levels, and I
would certainly not call it broken.

Bottom line - should Fedora ship the proprietary JDK shim? I don't
think it's worth the user confusion over just telling people to go to
JPackage, but if someone stepped up, did the work, and submitted it
and was going to maintain/own it, it might happen.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 07:44 PM
"Stephen John Smoogen"
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version because it's
> > developers have said so.
>
> So what you're really saying is Fedora doesn't support Java < 6 very
> well. I don't think anyone would disagree, but you have to understand
> it's not a very interesting problem; these projects should really be
> working to update for 6, regardless of Fedora or OpenJDK - Java 5 is
> in pure maintenance mode now.
>
> I'm sure there's a fair amount of software out there that doesn't work
> on Java 6, but it's not "most" by a long shot.
>

It depends on the sphere of software... 90% of our business software
only works on 1.4.2 and the other 10% only works on 1.5. And so does
all of the java apps the company programmers have written to work with
the closed source stuff. When we asked when they would support 1.6..
the word was they weren't.. they would go to 1.7 when it was released
or .NET because Java was just not 'stable' enough for them.

While thats all closed source.. the mindset affects others who work on
Java in the open.


> > > It's been well known for years how to install the proprietary
> > > JDK;
> > >
> >
> > Well known by?
>
> Really...it's in a lot of FAQs, etc.
>

Agreed.

> > That would have been just fine, but there have been long intervals where
> > jpackage has not had a suitable repo (and again, I don't see any reason that
> > should even have needed to change across fedora versions since java code is
> > pretty much independent of anything else)
>
> Perhaps; I've personally only used the jpackage shims on RHEL (which
> is much closer to jpackage's target audience).
>
> > and in earlier conversations here
> > I thought someone said the relationship was deliberately broken with
> > portions moved into fedora packages and the rest ignored.
>
> If Fedora and JPackage were on Facebook, the relationship status would
> be "It's complicated". But we are cooperating on many levels, and I
> would certainly not call it broken.
>

Well better than "Incestous.. keep clotting drugs close by."

> Bottom line - should Fedora ship the proprietary JDK shim? I don't
> think it's worth the user confusion over just telling people to go to
> JPackage, but if someone stepped up, did the work, and submitted it
> and was going to maintain/own it, it might happen.
>
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
>



--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 08:10 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

Colin Walters wrote:

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:

I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version because it's
developers have said so.


So what you're really saying is Fedora doesn't support Java < 6 very
well.


Yes, as in what pretty much all existing large projects use. I actually
haven't investigated this much beyond OpenNMS and would be happy to hear
otherwise about opengrok, alfresco, openfire, spark etc.


> I don't think anyone would disagree, but you have to understand

it's not a very interesting problem; these projects should really be
working to update for 6, regardless of Fedora or OpenJDK - Java 5 is
in pure maintenance mode now.


Maintenance mode is what developers using things like. No surprises.


I'm sure there's a fair amount of software out there that doesn't work
on Java 6, but it's not "most" by a long shot.


Do you have some examples of large and useful things like those above?
I suppose jboss should be the canonical example.



It's been well known for years how to install the proprietary
JDK;


Well known by?


Really...it's in a lot of FAQs, etc.


Are any of them fedora-hosted where a user would likely look for this
information?



That would have been just fine, but there have been long intervals where
jpackage has not had a suitable repo (and again, I don't see any reason that
should even have needed to change across fedora versions since java code is
pretty much independent of anything else)


Perhaps; I've personally only used the jpackage shims on RHEL (which
is much closer to jpackage's target audience).


But EL5 wasn't supported for long after its introduction either.


and in earlier conversations here
I thought someone said the relationship was deliberately broken with
portions moved into fedora packages and the rest ignored.


If Fedora and JPackage were on Facebook, the relationship status would
be "It's complicated". But we are cooperating on many levels, and I
would certainly not call it broken.


Is this changing? I do see some stuff for f7/8 that I didn't think was
there before.



Bottom line - should Fedora ship the proprietary JDK shim? I don't
think it's worth the user confusion over just telling people to go to
JPackage, but if someone stepped up, did the work, and submitted it
and was going to maintain/own it, it might happen.


If jpackage has a suitable documented repo, that's fine. I just
couldn't find any for fc7/8 or rhel5 for a year or so.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmiksell@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 08:23 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

Les Mikesell wrote:

Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com>
wrote:
I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version
because it's

developers have said so.


So what you're really saying is Fedora doesn't support Java < 6 very
well.


Yes, as in what pretty much all existing large projects use. I actually
haven't investigated this much beyond OpenNMS and would be happy to hear
otherwise about opengrok, alfresco, openfire, spark etc.


Most of them do. Opengrok is in the Fedora repository. Alfresco claims
to support Java 1.5 and above. I am sure you can do your own research
for the apps you really need.


Rahul

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 08:32 PM
"Jason Corley"
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

> Colin Walters wrote:
> Perhaps; I've personally only used the jpackage shims on RHEL (which
> is much closer to jpackage's target audience).

At JPackage we support as many distros as we can that we have users
and developers for. To say we focus on RHEL (or any distro) is
incorrect as that absolutely is not the target of the project. Nor is
exclusive support for Fedora, OpenSuSE, or Mandriva. All of those
added together (and then some more thrown in) are our focus.

> If Fedora and JPackage were on Facebook, the relationship status would
> be "It's complicated".

JPackage is on Facebook. ;-) http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7643070828

Jason

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-02-2008, 11:52 PM
Stuart Children
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

On Fri, May 02, 2008 at 01:44:04PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version because it's
> > > developers have said so.
> >
> > So what you're really saying is Fedora doesn't support Java < 6 very
> > well. I don't think anyone would disagree, but you have to understand
> > it's not a very interesting problem; these projects should really be
> > working to update for 6, regardless of Fedora or OpenJDK - Java 5 is
> > in pure maintenance mode now.

Surely this is the key in this discussion. I would imagine people are agreed
that Fedora isn't going to stay at 1.4 or below. Once you've accepted 1.5, IME
1.6 is a small step.

> > I'm sure there's a fair amount of software out there that doesn't work
> > on Java 6, but it's not "most" by a long shot.

I echo that from my experiences (both professional and personal).

> It depends on the sphere of software... 90% of our business software
> only works on 1.4.2 and the other 10% only works on 1.5. And so does
> all of the java apps the company programmers have written to work with
> the closed source stuff. When we asked when they would support 1.6..
> the word was they weren't.. they would go to 1.7 when it was released
> or .NET because Java was just not 'stable' enough for them.
>
> While thats all closed source.. the mindset affects others who work on
> Java in the open.

Just to chime in with a very differing experience. I work for a pretty large
company (whose business is not IT, but has a significant IT department)
with quite a few internal Java apps. My team has been using
1.6 for all current development for some time. Most others I'm aware of are
using at least 1.5. Both here and at a previous company we've moved forward
major JVM versions to pick up useful new features or obscure bug/performance
fixes - the latter not ideal upgrade reasons obviously. The JRE installed
on desktops (and so what any GUI-apps will be using) is 1.5. As you say....
it depends.

In my team's main product we use a lot of open sources libraries and
components, and a few commercial (totally close source) ones too. IME,
anyone whose product is reasonably active will not be ignoring 1.6.

Cheers

--
Stuart

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 12:01 AM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

Colin Walters wrote:

Bottom line - should Fedora ship the proprietary JDK shim? I don't
think it's worth the user confusion over just telling people to go to
JPackage, but if someone stepped up, did the work, and submitted it
and was going to maintain/own it, it might happen.



If "proprietary JDK shim" is the nosrc.rpm for the proprietary JDK's I
don't think it should go into Fedora.


-Toshio

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 12:40 AM
Konrad Meyer
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

Quoth Jason Corley:
> > Colin Walters wrote:
> > Perhaps; I've personally only used the jpackage shims on RHEL (which
> > is much closer to jpackage's target audience).
>
> At JPackage we support as many distros as we can that we have users
> and developers for. To say we focus on RHEL (or any distro) is
> incorrect as that absolutely is not the target of the project. Nor is
> exclusive support for Fedora, OpenSuSE, or Mandriva. All of those
> added together (and then some more thrown in) are our focus.

I believe Colin meant more that JPackage targeted EL distributions such as
RHEL (or SLES, etc) more than distributions like Fedora. (I don't have any
idea if this is correct or not, but I don't think he meant to say that
JPackage only targets RHEL.)

Regards,
--
Conrad Meyer <konrad@tylerc.org>
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 12:41 AM
"Colin Walters"
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, as in what pretty much all existing large projects use. I actually
> haven't investigated this much beyond OpenNMS and would be happy to hear
> otherwise about opengrok, alfresco, openfire, spark etc.

OpenGrok is in Fedora. We actually use openfire on the Mugshot
servers which are running OpenJDK 6, though we have some
modifications.

> Do you have some examples of large and useful things like those above? I
> suppose jboss should be the canonical example.

Besides the above, just look at all of the Java software in Fedora and
JPackage now. Pretty much all of it should be JDK 6 compatible.

> > Really...it's in a lot of FAQs, etc.
> >
>
> Are any of them fedora-hosted where a user would likely look for this
> information?

Not "officially", but:

http://www.fedorafaq.org/#java

Anyways, what I'm saying is that largely the Fedora Java efforts are
focused around OpenJDK 6+, and over time as those remaining projects
fix their software the need for what you're asking for should go away.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 02:05 AM
Matthew Saltzman
 
Default Fedora and JPackage proprietary JDK shims

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 17:01 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Colin Walters wrote:
> > Bottom line - should Fedora ship the proprietary JDK shim? I don't
> > think it's worth the user confusion over just telling people to go to
> > JPackage, but if someone stepped up, did the work, and submitted it
> > and was going to maintain/own it, it might happen.
> >
>
> If "proprietary JDK shim" is the nosrc.rpm for the proprietary JDK's I
> don't think it should go into Fedora.

Not sure, but I bet the "shim" is the java-sun-compat package that lets
you install the Sun RPM, then sets up alternatives and other symlinks to
make the expected incantations work. That is not a nosrc package,
though it may have no actual source. It depends on the Sun RPM from
java.sun.com.

>
> -Toshio
>
>
--
Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs

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

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:23 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org