Re: Java problem

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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

-- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux