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 User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-28-2008, 10:13 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Java and openjdk

Les Mikesell wrote:

That's a matter of opinion. It may matter to you why your 3rd party
application doesn't run. It matters to me whether it runs or not.


It is not a matter of opinion. You claimed that if Fedora shipped
official Java, then the problems would disappear for third party
applications. It certainly wouldn't and that has been proven by what is
available in Fedora 9 which passes the TCK tests 100%.


OpenJDK is Fedora 9 is officially Java and certified as such. You
cannot continue to claim otherwise. If you still run into problems,
you should be filing bug reports.


Against what? Applications that specify that they require Sun Java 1.4
or 1.5?


Are you running any recent release of Fedora? What are the specific
issues? Depending on implementation specific quirks would certainly be a
bug. Have you ever filed a single bug report in
http://bugzilla.redhat.com against Fedora? Your bugs should be filed
depending on whether it is a application issue or a implementation
issue. If applications follow the standard specification, they would be
compatible with all implementation s of Java which follow the
specification whether it is OpenJDK in Fedora 9, Sun Java, IBM Java or
something else.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 02:22 AM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Java and openjdk

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Les Mikesell wrote:

That's a matter of opinion. It may matter to you why your 3rd party
application doesn't run. It matters to me whether it runs or not.


It is not a matter of opinion. You claimed that if Fedora shipped
official Java, then the problems would disappear for third party
applications.


I don't think that's exactly what I said. I think I said Sun Java but
in any case what I meant if if wasn't clear were the versions needed to
run 3rd party apps. And at this point that is generally Sun Java 1.5 or
sometimes 1.4.


OpenJDK is Fedora 9 is officially Java and certified as such. You
cannot continue to claim otherwise. If you still run into problems,
you should be filing bug reports.


Against what? Applications that specify that they require Sun Java 1.4
or 1.5?


Are you running any recent release of Fedora?


No, they have been too painful.


What are the specific issues?


OpenNMS would be a good test. At the moment it won't work with either
java 1.6 or postgresql 8.3. Yes, those are mostly application issues,
but regarding different behavior by different versions.


Depending on implementation specific quirks would certainly be a
bug.


Agreed, but working is a yes or no question.

Have you ever filed a single bug report in
http://bugzilla.redhat.com against Fedora?


Not regarding java, as I've given up on caring if fedora continues to
ship broken versions or not. I would prefer a design that permits easy
installation of versions of my choice and co-existence of multiple
versions, though. Java is clearly designed to permit that even though
the fedora setup doesn't take into consideration that different apps may
need different versions at the same time.


Your bugs should be filed
depending on whether it is a application issue or a implementation
issue. If applications follow the standard specification, they would be
compatible with all implementation s of Java which follow the
specification whether it is OpenJDK in Fedora 9, Sun Java, IBM Java or
something else.


That hasn't been true, ever, as far as I know. Almost every large java
app will have some version-level dependencies - if you want to run them
you use the appropriate jvm. Maybe someday...



--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 04:27 AM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Java and openjdk

Les Mikesell wrote:

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Les Mikesell wrote:

That's a matter of opinion. It may matter to you why your 3rd party
application doesn't run. It matters to me whether it runs or not.


It is not a matter of opinion. You claimed that if Fedora shipped
official Java, then the problems would disappear for third party
applications.


I don't think that's exactly what I said.


Oh, sure. Feel free to look up the archives.

OpenNMS would be a good test.


.. which works fine.

http://yum.opennms.org/
http://blogs.opennms.org/?p=223

Run the latest release and if you find a actual problem, file a bug
report. Theoretical discussions are just wasting time.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 06:01 AM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Java and openjdk

Rahul Sundaram wrote:




That's a matter of opinion. It may matter to you why your 3rd party
application doesn't run. It matters to me whether it runs or not.


It is not a matter of opinion. You claimed that if Fedora shipped
official Java, then the problems would disappear for third party
applications.


I don't think that's exactly what I said.


Oh, sure. Feel free to look up the archives.


Different conversation, I guess. Was that back when fedora was shipping
something that not only wasn't a version that would run 3rd party apps
but it also wouldn't pass any conformance tests? And you still defended
the product?


OpenNMS would be a good test.


.. which works fine.

http://yum.opennms.org/
http://blogs.opennms.org/?p=223


Errr, that blog says it builds... Is it your/fedora's policy that if
something builds you should ship it? The fedora versions that do work
work because they require this:

http://yum.opennms.org/unstable/common/jdk/i386/jdk-1_5_0_15-linux-i586.rpm

Run the latest release and if you find a actual problem, file a bug
report. Theoretical discussions are just wasting time.


Repeating other people's mistakes is what wastes time. Here's what one
of their developers said more recently:
http://n2.nabble.com/Broken-Startup-on-Fedora-9-td640408.html#a640628


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com



--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 06:23 AM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Java and openjdk

Les Mikesell wrote:

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Oh, sure. Feel free to look up the archives.


Different conversation, I guess.


You claimed a official Java implementation wouldn't have issues. OpenJDK
is one.


Errr, that blog says it builds... Is it your/fedora's policy that if
something builds you should ship it?


You presume a lot without me saying anything of that as usual. This
discussion was never about shipping anything.


http://blogs.opennms.org/?p=223

There is a screenshot showing that it works. If you are not even running
a recent release of Fedora, this doesn't affect you anyway. So again a
theoretical discussion which I am not interested in.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 08:12 AM
Lyvim Xaphir
 
Default Java and openjdk

On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 11:53 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> > Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >> Oh, sure. Feel free to look up the archives.
> >
> > Different conversation, I guess.
>
> You claimed a official Java implementation wouldn't have issues. OpenJDK
> is one.
>
> > Errr, that blog says it builds... Is it your/fedora's policy that if
> > something builds you should ship it?
>
> You presume a lot without me saying anything of that as usual.

What in the hell are you talking about? The sentence was a question,
not a statement, in text, no less. How obtuse do you have to be in
order to miss that? The real amusement tho kicks in when you assume the
presumption on his side when it's actually YOUR presumption to attempt
to make his question into a statement. Fyi: This ? usually means
question, and this . usually proceeds a statement. What you need to do
is finish your 9th year high school grammar courses. Did you ever
manage to finally get that GED?

> This discussion was never about shipping anything.

So what? It is now. BFD. What other inconvenient questions are you
going to ban?

>
> http://blogs.opennms.org/?p=223
>
> There is a screenshot showing that it works. If you are not even running
> a recent release of Fedora, this doesn't affect you anyway. So again a
> theoretical discussion which I am not interested in.
>
> Rahul

I think you're not interested in any discussion in which you're losing
the argument, ivory tower boy.


LX

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 08:17 AM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Java and openjdk

Lyvim Xaphir wrote:


What in the hell are you talking about? The sentence was a question,
not a statement, in text, no less. How obtuse do you have to be in
order to miss that?


You can always phrase a question and still presume things. For example,
are you a complete idiot?



I think you're not interested in any discussion in which you're losing
the argument, ivory tower boy.


If you can't refrain from name calling, you might as well as stay out of
the discussion.


Rahul

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 08:21 AM
Ed Greshko
 
Default Java and openjdk

Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 11:53 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>> Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>>> Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh, sure. Feel free to look up the archives.
>>>>
>>> Different conversation, I guess.
>>>
>> You claimed a official Java implementation wouldn't have issues. OpenJDK
>> is one.
>>
>>
>>> Errr, that blog says it builds... Is it your/fedora's policy that if
>>> something builds you should ship it?
>>>
>> You presume a lot without me saying anything of that as usual.
>>
>
> What in the hell are you talking about? The sentence was a question,
> not a statement, in text, no less. How obtuse do you have to be in
> order to miss that? The real amusement tho kicks in when you assume the
> presumption on his side when it's actually YOUR presumption to attempt
> to make his question into a statement. Fyi: This ? usually means
> question, and this . usually proceeds a statement. What you need to do
> is finish your 9th year high school grammar courses. Did you ever
> manage to finally get that GED?
>

You are not a native English speaker, right? The question itself is so
outlandish that it is very doubtful that it is truly a question being
asked. I'm sure there is a unique label for this type of literary
technique...but it escapes me at the moment.



--
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller
than the both put together."

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 08:52 AM
Lyvim Xaphir
 
Default Java and openjdk

On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 13:47 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
>
> > What in the hell are you talking about? The sentence was a question,
> > not a statement, in text, no less. How obtuse do you have to be in
> > order to miss that?
>
> You can always phrase a question and still presume things.

However the only person that knows the presumption for sure is the one
phrasing the question. In order for you to have reached a conclusion
about his question, _you_ required presumption, which makes YOU the
guilty party, not him. Per my original statement. So your statement
above hangs yourself; thanks for the assistance by way of damning
yourself for me.


> For example, are you a complete idiot?

Now let's proceed to the point where you preach about name calling,
shall we?

>
> > I think you're not interested in any discussion in which you're losing
> > the argument, ivory tower boy.
>
> If you can't refrain from name calling, you might as well as stay out of
> the discussion.
>
> Rahul

But I can do "name calling" and stay fully within the context of truth;
for example, I can call an apple an apple, an orange an orange, and
Rahul Sundaram an ivory tower boy. Now even you, the epitome of
obtuseness, can see how well that works. BTW did you ever get that GED?

LX

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 
Old 08-29-2008, 08:53 AM
Lyvim Xaphir
 
Default Java and openjdk

On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 16:21 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:

> >
>
> You are not a native English speaker, right? The question itself is so
> outlandish that it is very doubtful that it is truly a question being
> asked. I'm sure there is a unique label for this type of literary
> technique...but it escapes me at the moment.

I think that basic reasoning also escapes you, pretty much at all
moments.

LX

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:14 PM.

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