Craig White wrote:
On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 22:03 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
Craig White wrote:
Maybe there should be something in /etc/alternatives...
Or maybe no one should have ever shipped an imitation java that doesn't
meet the spec and called it java in the first place.
Of course the issue is and has always been Sun's restrictive licensing
and if it weren't for the 'imitation java' as you call it, Sun might
never have decided to migrate Java to GPL...but they still aren't
there...
Why is the license an issue? The distribution doesn't have to include
everything to work with it.
----
I know you are on CentOS list. You know that Sun requires idemnification
from anyone who redistributes their software which is why so few
redistribute their software. Then of course, there's the restriction
against using it in nuclear plants which apparently is enough to get
Fedora/RH to drop the pdftk (F8 users can rebuild from F7 src RPM).
----
OK, there's this thing called the internet, where you can get things
from other places - places that are willing to distribute them.
----
yeah...why don't you complain to them?
----
Thus without the 'imitation java' (as you call
it), there wouldn't be a fully functioning OpenOffice.org, and no
Docbook XSL, no Tomcat, no Eclipse, etc.
OK, I could live with those not working until I install a java that
meets the official spec.
----
OK - good for you. Are you suggesting that Fedora create a bunch more
Totem type situations? Are you suggesting that Fedora ship a broken
OpenOffice.org? Are you suggesting that the Eclipse environment not work
out of the box? Are you suggesting that the whole notion of
'pre-requisite' packages go ignored where Java is concerned?
Besides...I'm certain that you have a skill set that would allow you
completely remove the gcj version and install the Sun version so I fail
to see where you're harmed by the current setup.
----
Thus with your logic, people would logically go to another distro that
either embraces restrictive licensed software or pisses on restrictive
licensing.
How about one that respects both other companies licenses and their own
users? As in making Sun java work when installed?
----
Isn't that Sun's job? There isn't a Sun java package available from any
Fedora package/respin/repository that I am aware of.
----
So while it may feel useful to bemoan the 'imitation java' aka, GCJ
version, it provides most of the functionality...and last I checked,
even the Sun Java '64' couldn't run applets.
I'm bemoaning calling it java. If you don't ship a fully conforming
java, don't execute it with the name java. And isn't the 64-bit applet
problem specific to Linux, not java?
----
I don't know about Windows 64...it's not very popular you know and I am
not rushing out to get it myself. If Sun's Windows 64 bit version works
properly, it would be one of the few software packages that does.
Craig
It is interesting the hoops technical people jump through for
Political reasons. Java exists on a web page somewhere and it is
operating system independent. It is free to all users.
But the users need to know how to get it and mount it. If Fedora is
not going to use the real java in their distribution it is another
reason other versions of Linux are slowly being used by the public (I
have not seen any yet in my Wal-Mart).
In competition with Windows you do things that are not good from the
free software point of view. In my opinion we should change the
definition of free to include software available free but without source
code. In this group comes the driver for Nvidia hardware. I think what's
happening is a Political fix where someone is using the Nvidia software
which is NOT with a source code, and when a new kernel is ready they run
the Nvidia software and make the kernel driver(s), which are then put in
a rpm file and sent to users as a Update. It looks good but is it really
good?
Karl
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7
