On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 12:18 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Craig White wrote: > > >>> yeah...why don't you complain to them? > >> Them? Fedora is the one that ships something that isn't java that > >> executes when you type 'java'. > > ---- > > I guess I missed the post where you found something that didn't work > > because of their GCJ version. > > I omitted that, thinking it was self-evident. It doesn't run OpenNMS, > the resin web server, or much of anything else I've found. Even > azureus, the simple bittorrent client has this statment on their wiki: > "Azureus 2.4.0.0 and greater may run with GCJ 4.1.0 or greater, however > some people experience problems which does not occur with the J2SE > version." Who has time for that kind of trouble? ---- openNMS isn't packaged or distributed with Fedora is it? azureus seems to work fine with gcj ---- > > not if you run > > alternatives --config java # and set it to Sun's installation > > But it doesn't work with Sun's RPM, which my point. ---- it doesn't? It has worked for me on Fedora 7/8 CentOS 5 and RHEL 5 I must be lucky then. ---- > It could have been > made to work out of the box for the price of a couple of symlinks and > saved every user hours and hours of time and trouble. Other > distributions have gone farther than that. ---- Indeed they have...you always have the option of using another distribution that is more in line with your thinking. ---- > And RedHat does for their > paying up2date customers, while still claiming they "can't" redistribute > for fedora users: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2007-0582.html ---- but that is on a separate CD and isn't installed by anaconda. It's no different than you can download directly from Sun and it isn't even the current version ---- > > > not if you set the proper environment variables such as > > CLASSPATH/JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME or simply put the java binary in your $PATH > > Yes, but then that part is done wrong for every java component that is > included in the distro. ---- or done correctly for any user that wants to exercise control over their own environment. ---- > > Too bad that Sun's instructions for doing these things are vague or > > non-existent. > > If it is no trouble, will you set it up my computers for free? Or at > least quantify your meaning by stating what you would charge? Sun has > no instructions for --alternatives, and if you think the jpackage > documentation (for the versions they supported - they seem to have given > up on fedora) to build an alternatives-conforming package is simple and > straightforward you've found something I missed. ---- sure...give me root ;-) seriously though, java just hasn't been a problem for me and I've been fooling with it quite a bit lately with Alfresco, docbook-XSL and even managed to implement ruby-java-bridge for ongoing Ruby on Rails development. ---- > > The only straightfoward way I've found is the yummable version at the > opennms site, with dropping the sun binary under /usr/java and replacing > every shred of the alternatives system you can find with direct symlinks > as a distant second. ---- again...opennms is not a fedora/redhat package so it's pre-requisites are not of fedora packaging concerns. Do you really run opennms on a Fedora system anyway? I thought you were more inclined to install stuff like this on an 'Enterprise' type server. I just looked at the openNMS site and it appears that java isn't included in openNMS packages so you still have to manage a separate install. By the way, I've been using Zenoss which appears to be similar to OpenNMS...have you any comparison to offer? ---- > I think its amusing that Linux browser plugins haven't worked for so > long, yet it is so highly touted. ---- which ones don't work for you? That hasn't been an issue for me ---- > Solaris may avoid the issue completely > because I think they have a generic 32/64 bit library thunking facility. > I don't recall having any problem on Macs either but haven't paid much > attention to what is 32 bit vs. 64 bit since it all seems to work. > > > With Solaris, you also get ZFS but > > on the other hand, you get a ridiculously ancient perl-5.6 because they > > don't want to break backwards compatibility. This is an imperfect world > > we live in. > > ZFS is just one of the many things that linux can't have because of the > restrictions in the GPL (and Linus's refusal to stick to his early claim > that his license exception regarding interface use applies to kernel > modules). The number actually includes all code with any license that > doesn't exactly match the GPL - and it always will. > > I had hoped that Nexenta was going to give us the perfect combination of > OpenSolaris with zfs and an up to date Ubuntu based userland, but the > team seems to have gotten sidetracked building a commercial file server > appliance first. Maybe Apple will get their zfs out soon. ---- begin holding your breath now. When Apple does get around to releasing something like this, it should only take a few updates to actually get it to work as they seem stuck in a perpetual beta loop. Apple continually ships broken software - i.e. Back to My Mac http://db.tidbits.com/article/9346 / Quicktime which has had a horrible year wrt security issues and on and on. Craig
