On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 21:42 -0800, Kam Leo wrote: > On Dec 28, 2007 8:33 PM, Craig White <craigwhite@xxxxxxxxxxx> 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 > > Stop being so fanboyish and an ingrate. You shout praises for Open > Office but don't give credit to the donor of the source code. That's > right, Sun. Without much of the Sun donated code the Linux desktop > wouldn't be competitive with MS Office. ---- ingrate? fanboyish? I suppose if I appreciate Red Hat's commitment to open source and unrestricted license software that says something but I don't think that makes me an ingrate or a fanatic. Please note that OpenOffice.org (which is what I presume you are referring to with your reference to MS Office) carries a much different license than all other Sun software and without a doubt in my mind, led to the vast community contributions of code which brought OpenOffice.org up to speed in such a quick time. Clearly the 'Star Office' product that Sun purchased years ago was a weak competitor to Microsoft Office until they opened the source code and released it as GPL. I am quite certain that if/when Sun gets around to releasing their Java as fully GPL and removing their restrictive licensing terms, Fedora and Red Hat would gladly adopt it as main stream. Craig
