Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > Le mardi 13 mars 2007 à 14:01 -0400, Matthew Miller a écrit : > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 01:54:56PM -0400, Rob Crittenden wrote: > > > But any random JVM that a user downloads from Sun or IBM > > > directly wouldn't know about this extra endorsement, right? > > > So any non-rpm-installed JVMs would still not work? > > > > They would work fine for whatever they were installed for. They > > just wouldn't work for this. Presuming that "this" can be made to > > work just fine with gcj and/or future-free-java, then it should > > just stay that way. Am I not getting something? > > > > I mean, do we consider "the kernel doesn't build with Microsoft C" > > a problem? > > The kernel is mature and the main implementation. If fedora-packaged > java apps fail when people try to use them with proprietary jvms > that's a bigger problem. Till gcj is mature, efficient and > recognized in the marketplace being able to mix and replace > components (including the jvm) is a huge plus. I was thinking with a view that post-F7 we will likely be able to ship a modified Sun JVM. Cheers, Gary -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
