On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 23:38 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> > ----
> >> Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL.
> > ----
> > I'd be interested to see what evidence you offer for this besides just a
> > gut feeling. I've seen similar comments but they seem to be spouted by
> > people who simply don't know anything empirically. I haven't seen that
> > comment made by anyone from Red Hat but perhaps you have and can point
> > out a link to me.
>
> Go through the fedora mail list archives and note how the system
> stabilizes and complaints stop a few months before a new RHEL release.
> Then compare the program versions in the RHEL release to what fedora
> users were running. You'll find a couple of surprises out of the
> thousands of packages. RHEL4 including mysql5 would be a notable
> difference to the FC3 contemporary; adding the Sun jdk to RHEL4/5
> updates after the release would be another. And look at the problems
> mentioned on the mail list as major changes begin again in the following
> fedora version.
----
just for the record, I remember getting an 'extra' CD with the store
bought RHL 7.1 that contained Java and I believe Acrobat Reader rpm's so
the notion that this is something that started with RHEL 4/5 simply
doesn't wash.
As for the notion that the system stabilizes prior to a new RHEL
release, that's entirely anecdotal. There's no question that Red Hat
personnel are involved in the development of both and it's likely that
when approaching the cycle release points of RHEL, less efforts are made
on edge releases but that would likely vary depending upon whether it
was core items or software that wasn't likely to provide libraries that
other software needs.
Craig
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 12:47 PM
Tim
Java problem
On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:15 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote:
> I recall getting java from Sun because Open Office said it would not
> work well without it.
I've found it to work well without any Java. Only some features make
use of it, and they're obviously not ones that I'm using.
Using FC 4, 5, 6 & 7, plus CentOS 5. Today, it's FC7.
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 02:25 PM
David Boles
Java problem
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Kam Leo wrote:
> Yes. The "buy me" includes a manual and some level of support. (Red
> Hat drop such offerings and switched to Fedora.) Novell, offers
> enterprise versions under the SUSE brand: http://www.novell.com/linux/
>
>
> Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
"I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
the ISS from Windows 2000.
ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
not work with XP Home.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 05:34 PM
Les Mikesell
Java problem
Craig White wrote:
----
just for the record, I remember getting an 'extra' CD with the store
bought RHL 7.1 that contained Java and I believe Acrobat Reader rpm's so
the notion that this is something that started with RHEL 4/5 simply
doesn't wash.
The addition of the Sun java rpm to the updates repository is what is
different. The old 'extra' CD had commercial demos without ongoing support.
As for the notion that the system stabilizes prior to a new RHEL
release, that's entirely anecdotal.
OK, there are only three data points and even though all three show the
same thing you can still say it isn't enough to prove the case...
There's no question that Red Hat
personnel are involved in the development of both and it's likely that
when approaching the cycle release points of RHEL, less efforts are made
on edge releases but that would likely vary depending upon whether it
was core items or software that wasn't likely to provide libraries that
other software needs.
I've forgotten the exact details, but I think there was a discussion on
the CentOS list about some things that were the same binaries as fedora
being included in RHEL5 without a recompile and causing some trouble
when they did their rebuild-from-source.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 05:49 PM
Les Mikesell
Java problem
Peter Boy wrote:
It's rather a long thread now, but I think we must have the patience to
explain and promote key principles again and again.
It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of this
choice instead of blindly defending it.
Am Samstag, den 29.12.2007, 18:17 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the reference
version of java. And why it ships something that executes with the name
java that probably doesn't pass the compatibility tests.
Simply the wrong questions.
It is the one that matters.
Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora choosed
not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
They did both. Including or not including isn't the issue. Making it
difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one
problem. A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix
this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the
distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal
symlinks.
And Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with ..." but choosed to
support the development of a truly free alternative which is (rsp. was)
intended to achieve compatibility, but needed time for development and
testing.
The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
but executing it with the java name. Microsoft tried to promote an
incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
and Sun successfully sued them over it. The fedora-shipped not-java
program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests. I'm
surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
Those who need a reference-compatible version have to install a Java
distribution outside the Fedora repositories. And there are provisions
that you can do that without conflicts with the Fedora (test) version.
Ooohh fedora has 'provisions' to permit it to run outside programs.
Great...
So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
parallel. That's the Fedora way.
It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
And regarding the file locations: it is not part of the reference. And
when you engage a search engine of your choice you will find a lot of
discussios in the past about problems with the file layout Sun choosed
to use.
What I find in a search is a confusing and conflicting mess of
instructions about how to fix fedora in various ways. As for file
layouts, they are pretty much arbitrary and I don't see anything to
defend the choice of parking executable binaries under /usr/lib either.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 06:01 PM
Rahul Sundaram
Java problem
Les Mikesell wrote:
The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
but executing it with the java name. Microsoft tried to promote an
incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
and Sun successfully sued them over it. The fedora-shipped not-java
program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests. I'm
surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't
consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used
the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort.
IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in
Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to
remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes
completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.
Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
paved the way to better compatibility.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 07:00 PM
"Kam Leo"
Java problem
On Dec 30, 2007 7:25 AM, David Boles <dgboles@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kam Leo wrote:
>
> > Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
>
>
> Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
>
> "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
> installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
> Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
> because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
> the ISS from Windows 2000.
>
> ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
> included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
> not work with XP Home.
What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either.
> David
How did XP Home get into this conversation?
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 07:07 PM
"Kam Leo"
Java problem
On Dec 30, 2007 12:00 PM, Kam Leo <kam.leo@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 30, 2007 7:25 AM, David Boles <dgboles@gmail.com> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Kam Leo wrote:
> >
> > > Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
> >
> >
> > Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
> >
> > "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
> > installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
> > Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
> > because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
> > the ISS from Windows 2000.
> >
> > ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
> > included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
> > not work with XP Home.
>
> What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
> applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either.
>
> > David
>
> How did XP Home get into this conversation?
>
Sorry, I hit the send key by accident. I was going to add that XP Home
is a stripped down OS so why drag it into the discussion?
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 07:16 PM
Gene Heskett
Java problem
On Sunday 30 December 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>Les Mikesell wrote:
>> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
>> but executing it with the java name. Microsoft tried to promote an
>> incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
>> and Sun successfully sued them over it. The fedora-shipped not-java
>> program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
>> shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests. I'm
>> surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>
>That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't
>consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used
>the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort.
>IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in
>Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to
>remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes
>completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.
>
>Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
>until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
>paved the way to better compatibility.
>
>http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-jav
>a/
>
>Rahul
Excellent news, Rahul. Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe?
--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
There can be no twisted thought without a twisted molecule.
-- R. W. Gerard
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
12-30-2007, 07:22 PM
Rahul Sundaram
Java problem
Gene Heskett wrote:
Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
paved the way to better compatibility.
Excellent news, Rahul. Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe?
IcedTea which is included already in Fedora 8 (and other distributions)
already is as close as it gets to a 100% open source OpenJDK. Removing
the remaining binary encumbrances from OpenJDK has been a slow process.
Sun has licensed third party code which frequently needs to be entirely
replaced with free and open source equivalents or written from scratch
and plugged in. The agreement between Red Hat and Sun helps here but it
is no magic bullet. There is ongoing work on this and IcedTea will
continue to pull in the latest bits from OpenJDK. More details at
The other important reason to continue with a alternative implementation
is the OpenJDK is currently x86 only while Fedora already supports
x86_64 and PPC and more architecture support being added for upcoming
releases.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures
Rahul
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Java problem
