Java problem

[eng.waleed]

Hi
I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it give me done with no
prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ , can any one suggest some thing about that
? 
Br

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 22:43 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  On Friday 28 December 2007, Craig White wrote:
>  >On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 21:37 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  >> On Friday 28 December 2007, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  >> >Cameron Simpson wrote:
>  >> >>>>> Hi
>  >> >>>>> I installed the jre from the file
> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
>  >> >>>>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in
> /usr/bin/ ,
>  >> >>>>> can any one suggest some thing about that ?
>  >> >>>>
>  >> >>>> ----
>  >> >>>> look in /usr/java
>  >> >>>>
>  >> >>>> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in
> /usr/bin
>  >> >>>> but that should never be necessary.
>  >> >>>
>  >> >>> It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java
> should
>  >> >>> live.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> It's a third party RPM!
>  >> >> Of course it should install out of the way!
>  >> >> That way you can use Sun's RPM or another RPM, or both!
>  >> >>
>  >> >>> For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this
>  >> >>> breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> 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.
>  >>
>  >> +5 at least, Les.
>  >
>  >----
>  >I can't see any reason why you should have more than 1 vote
>  
>  Which you usually discount anyway, based on my Senior Citizen discount status 
>  or whatever..  So I vote early and often to compensate. :)
>  
>  >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...
>  >
>  >from my installation of jdk-1.6.0.0.3 under LICENSE...
>  >
>  >3. RESTRICTIONS. Software is confidential and copyrighted.
>  >Title to Software and all associated intellectual property
>  >rights is retained by Sun and/or its licensors. Unless
>  >enforcement is prohibited by applicable law, you may not
>  >modify, decompile, or reverse engineer Software. You
>  >acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed or
>  >intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
>  >maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc.
>  >disclaims any express or implied warranty of fitness for
>  >such uses. No right, title or interest in or to any
>  >trademark, service mark, logo or trade name of Sun or its
>  >licensors is granted under this Agreement. Additional
>  >restrictions for developers and/or publishers licenses are
>  >set forth in the Supplemental License Terms.
>  >
>  >Thus with those restrictions, there is no way that Fedora or Red Hat
>  >would ever distribute it. 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.
>  >
>  >Thus with your logic, people would logically go to another distro that
>  >either embraces restrictive licensed software or pisses on restrictive
>  >licensing.
>  >
>  >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.
>  >
>  >Craig
>  
>  You should know by now that I'm pro open src, and have been since forever it 
>  seems.  But, if the people who write this stuff can use it in good 
>  conscience, then it doesn't bither me a bot to go download java from the real 
>  source.  It used to be blackdowns version that was the defacto std but it 
>  appears Sun has elbowed them out of the picture, mainly I believe by way of 
>  the free OpenOffice.org offering, the camels nose in the tent if you will.  
>  
>  In this case, its a whatever works reliably, we'll use it.  Without feeling 
>  like I should go and have my mouth warshed out with some of Grandma's good 
>  old Lye soap.
>  
>  If IcedTea or whatever they want to call it, could do what was requested, then 
>  more power to the coders that adapted it.  But it more often than not 
>  doesn't, and rather than filing bz's by the hundreds, we just go get what 
>  works, its far easier than filing a bz in terms of effort required.  Given 
>  the time & effort to go get the real thing, that should send the message that 
>  bz is still, although its gotten easier, a PITA to use. 
----
that's a lot of words that essentially mean nothing at all.

Fedora is a community project - if people want to pitch in to integrate
Sun's Java more easily, great, I'm all for it.

As it is distributed, the license is still restrictive and none of the
repositories will touch the packaging which means that you have to get
the software from Sun and rely upon their assistance (which is minimal)
to install / integrate.

In the meantime, Red Hat and Fedora are distributing a free version that
mostly works, on all platforms, without restrictive licensing, thereby
providing a working Tomcat, Eclipse, etc. I guess I fail to see what the
complaint is.

I don't recall ever seeing you post on something that you couldn't get
done with the GCJ version so I suspect that you are just downloading and
playing with the Sun version of Java because you think you need to do
that.

To the OP, I think I gave you a reasonable method to install either
Sun's JDK or JRE and to create the environmental variables so that each
user has full access to the Sun version.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

> >>> I installed the jre from the file
> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
> >>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
> >>> can any one suggest some thing about that ? 
> >> ----
> >> look in /usr/java
> >>
> >> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
> >> but that should never be necessary.
> > It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live. 
> >    For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this 
> > breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
>  ----
>  patience...
>  
>  They are finally getting around to licensing it under GPL, things are
>  finally stabilizing. 
Having everyone do things their own way is your idea of stabilizing? 
Who would it have hurt for either RH to make a system where Sun's 
packaging would drop in and run or for Sun to package it to match RH's 
arbitrary locations?  I never quite got the point of an RPM package that 
didn't work.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Karl Larsen]

David Boles wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>    
> > Craig White wrote:
> >    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?
> >     
>
>
>  I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  Nvidia drivers that you install?
>
>
>  - --
>
>
>    David
>
> >  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >  Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
> >
> >  iEYEARECAAYFAkd2V7QACgkQAO0wNI1X4QHg0wCgkR/e3siowxSS9i0udIyjT8Wo
> >  tacAoPhNC048+Au1/egN09lXE9zZ7nKa
> >  =YHBi
> >  -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
>     
    I do not know. Unbuto has Nvidia drivers that worked on my computer. 
But it was not perfect. I expect Windows which doesn't change kernels 5 
times a year, could have the driver within but not sure it does.

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 28, 2007 8:33 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com&gt; 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.

[Knute Johnson]

> Fedora is a community project - if people want to pitch in to
> integrate
> Sun's Java more easily, great, I'm all for it.
>
> As it is distributed, the license is still restrictive and none of the
> repositories will touch the packaging which means that you have to get
> the software from Sun and rely upon their assistance (which is minimal)
> to install / integrate.
>
> In the meantime, Red Hat and Fedora are distributing a free version that
> mostly works, on all platforms, without restrictive licensing, thereby
> providing a working Tomcat, Eclipse, etc. I guess I fail to see what the
> complaint is.
>
> I don't recall ever seeing you post on something that you couldn't get
> done with the GCJ version so I suspect that you are just downloading and
> playing with the Sun version of Java because you think you need to do
> that.
>
> To the OP, I think I gave you a reasonable method to install either
> Sun's JDK or JRE and to create the environmental variables so that each
> user has full access to the Sun version.
>
> Craig 
Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on both 32 
and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with the 
32bit version.

I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;

http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html

-- 
Knute Johnson
Molon Labe...

[Craig White]

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

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 21:42 -0800, Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 28, 2007 8:33 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com&gt;
> 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

[Craig White]

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

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Lamar Owen wrote:
>  > What is 'better'?  Sorry, I know that sounds like splitting hairs, but
>  > there is no way of proving something is 'better' (in the most amorphous
>  > sense of that already amorphous word) without releasing it. 
>  If you can't measure it, you can't improve it.  And if you
> haven't
>  measured it, why, if you release it, should someone install it? 
To help develop and test it perhaps? Fedora is a community, not a product.

>  Still, if you can't run the same binaries, scripts, and
> java-bytecode
>  across them, it doesn't matter that they share a tux logo somewhere. 
In a few ways I think it might be better that common binaries aren't 
guaranteed to run.  It does give an incentive to release source.  However, on 
the other hand, the source interface shouldn't be changed (even the kernel 
module source API!) within a release.  At release boundaries, sure, why not.  
But not within a release.

Yes, a user typically doesn't care about that.  But a user SHOULD care about 
it, and learn that truly Free software is a worthwhile goal, regardless of 
the inconvenience.  If you want convenience, buy SLED or RHWS.

While I am one who actually understands your issue, and while I agree with 
much of it, at the same time, when I chose to run Fedora 8 on this laptop I 
knew (or should have known) what I was getting into, and I also knew that 
things would be volatile.  This is not an Enterprise distribution, after all.  
Do I despise it when I have to hand-patch the VMware source shim to get it to 
compile, on a regular basis?  Sure I do; but it's as much VMware's fault as 
it is Fedora's.  And, for that matter, it's my own fault for choosing a 
proprietary virtualization solution on top of an unsupported (by VMware) 
distribution; and I accept that responsibility.  

Do I hate it when a new kernel version comes along that breaks the drivers for 
my video card?  Sure: but I chose to buy that card, I chose to run Fedora, 
and I chose to run the BLOB drivers; so it's my fault as much as it is the 
others' fault.  Will I submit bug reports?  Perhaps; perhaps I'll just wait, 
and perhaps I won't blindly update my kernel (very very few kernel bugs 
result in remote system compromise, and I run enough layers of security, and 
am willing enough to reinstall my system from scratch if need be, to where 
it's not an issue). Better, though, is that the manufacturer of my FireGL 
V3100 is releasing the source so that it can be integrated upstream, helping 
everyone.

But to bring it back to Java: Fedora is providing the most compatible Java 
that is available under a Fedora-compatible license.  It's not 100% 
compatible; but, then again, the Sun 1.6 isn't 100% compatible with 1.5, 
either. If you want the other Java, no one is going to stop you from 
installing it yourself.  If and when Sun's Java is available under a 
Fedora-compatible license, then it will likely be quickly incorporated 
(shades of the demise of Red Baron once Netscape was open enough!).  But even 
the Sun 1.7 probably won't run the applet/servlet combo that I care most 
about, as the 1.6 certainly doesn't.

This is much like the IPv4 to IPv6 'migration' situation that's been discussed

all over NANOG (and other networking groups) for years; the two different 
solutions of NAT and CIDR pretty much took the steam out of the motivation to 
upgrade to IPv6.  And NAT and CIDR, while they work well together, were 
presented as two different and competing solutions; many network ops (and 
especially protocol people, who seem to go out of their way to make it hard 
to NAT their protocols (H.323 and SIP, anyone?)) even today loathe NAT like 
bubonic plague.  Was NAT a wrong solution?  Is there a right and a wrong 
solution?  NAT (and especially dynamic 'overloading' NAPT, in cisco terms) is 
certainly the less free solution (it breaks the true peer-to-peer nature of 
IP, and creates a class of content consumers), even though it gives users the 
most IP numbering flexibility.

The 'purist' solution would have been IPv6 instead of NAT; use this as a 
comparison to the 'purely Free Fedora stance' versus the 'I just want it to 
work' stance: many network ops will say (probably correctly!) that NAT set 
back the Internet ten years or more on getting IPv6 deployed.  Of course, the 
overreaching expansion and bloat that is IPv6 didn't help any!  Necessity is 
the mother of invention; having no necessity produces feeping creaturitis.

Our 'popular network protocol' wasn't designed; it was developed in an 
iterative and not well managed process  (RFC's?  Managed?  ROTFL!) ; yet it 
works.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Tim]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:15 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote:
>  I recall getting java from Sun because Open Office said it would not
>
>  work well without it.  
I've found it to work well without any Java.  Only some features make
use of it, and they're obviously not ones that I'm using.

-- 
[tim@bigblack ~]$ uname -ipr
2.6.23.1-10.fc7 i686 i386

Using FC 4, 5, 6 & 7, plus CentOS 5.  Today, it's FC7.

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

>  ----
> >> No, Apple has perfected the notion of re-selling you the same software
> >> over and over again, ahem, Leopard, iWork and my current favorite story
> >> of Apple saying FU to their customers...BootCamp (we told you all along
> >> it was Beta...too bad it expired and now you have to pay to upgrade).
> > At least you can pay them and get what you want (and time machine is 
> > kind of cute).  With Linux they just say you can't ever have it (zfs) or 
> > you install dozens and dozens of kernels hoping one will finally work 
> > (firewire, etc.).
>  ----
>  paying scum suckers that give you free software that dies so that you
>  have to purchase an upgrade that actually doesn't have the date time
>  bomb has been a personal vexation from me ever since the days when BPI
>  sold accounting software written in BASIC. Something about companies
>  that use drug dealers as role models...
>  
>  Viva le choice 
I don't see this as conceptually much different than getting something 
claiming to be java that isn't with fedora but the real thing with paid 
RHEL/support.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 18:53 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  
>  > ----
>  >>> No, Apple has perfected the notion of re-selling you the same software
>  >>> over and over again, ahem, Leopard, iWork and my current favorite story
>  >>> of Apple saying FU to their customers...BootCamp (we told you all along
>  >>> it was Beta...too bad it expired and now you have to pay to upgrade).
>  >> At least you can pay them and get what you want (and time machine is 
>  >> kind of cute).  With Linux they just say you can't ever have it (zfs) or 
>  >> you install dozens and dozens of kernels hoping one will finally work 
>  >> (firewire, etc.).
>  > ----
>  > paying scum suckers that give you free software that dies so that you
>  > have to purchase an upgrade that actually doesn't have the date time
>  > bomb has been a personal vexation from me ever since the days when BPI
>  > sold accounting software written in BASIC. Something about companies
>  > that use drug dealers as role models...
>  > 
>  > Viva le choice
>  
>  I don't see this as conceptually much different than getting something 
>  claiming to be java that isn't with fedora but the real thing with paid 
>  RHEL/support. 
----
you wouldn't - I see it as vastly different

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 18:00 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote:

>      The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got 
>  jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with this 
----
mv jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin /tmp
su -
cd /tmp
chmod u+x jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin
./jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin

but I thought you already had it installed

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 16:40 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
>  >On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:04 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
>  >> >> Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on both
> 32 
>  >> >> and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
>  >> >> plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with
> the 
>  >> >> 32bit version.
>  >> >> 
>  >> >> I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
>  >> >> 
>  >> >> http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
>  >> >----
>  >> >I agree with the following notations...
>  >> >
>  >> >you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
>  >> >the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
>  >> >jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages such
>  >> >as the compaat-libstdc++-33
>  >> 
>  >> I works if you do it after, I never tried before.
>  >> 
>  >> >Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
>  >> >JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
>  >> >for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
>  >> >course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a
> users
>  >> >$PATH.
>  >> 
>  >> If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
>  >> the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation.
>  >----
>  >docbook-XSL for xalan/xerces/fop etc. Otherwise, you have to locate them
>  >with each call.
>  >
>  >Probably others too...
>  
>  Sorry, I have no idea what that means. 
----
that means that executing a java command such as this...

java org.apache.xalan.xslt.Process \
  -out some_output_file.html \
  -in some_input_file.xml \
  -xsl /var/www/html/docbook/docbook.xsl \
  -param use.extentions 1

or this...

java \
  -Djavax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory=\
     org.apache.xerces.jaxp.DocumentBuilderFactoryImpl \
  -Djavax.xml.parsers.SAXParserFactory=\
     org.apache.xerces.jaxp.SAXParserFactoryImpl \
  com.icl.saxon.StyleSheet \
  -o myfile.html \
  some_input_file.xml \
  /var/www/html/docbook/docbook.xsl \
  use.extensions=1

only works if the full path to xalan.jar/xerces.jar/saxon.jar are
located in $CLASSPATH environmental variable, otherwise, you have to
spell it out longhand with path within your usage command each time you
invoke it. It is Java's equivalent to the shell $PATH variable.

As you start to amass jar files, it can be really useful to manage them
with a CLASSPATH declaration. I'm presuming that is what most
applications such as a Tomcat or Alfreso are going to do (I gather they
build it on the fly based upon jar files in particular directories).

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 20:20 -0800, Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 29, 2007 7:24 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
>  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  > Hash: SHA1
>  >
>  > Kam Leo wrote:
>  > > On Dec 29, 2007 2:48 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > >
>  > > Neither openSuSE nor Fedora are end-all products. Both distributions
>  > > make decent servers. However, neither is ready to replace Microsoft's
>  > > Windows OS and the applications for that OS. Some day perhaps; just
>  > > not today.
>  >
>  >
>  > I am not familiar openSuSE. But I thought that, from what I have read,
>  > that openSuSE was a desktop oriented type distribution.
>  
>  Novell Corporation is the principle sponsor of openSUSE. openSUSE has
>  an enterprise version with full support. 
----
I am not knowledgeable here but what I see on
http://en.opensuse.org/Welcome_to_openSUSE.org
says "openSUSE also provides the base for Novell's award-winning SUSE
Linux Enterprise products" which has an entirely different meaning. I
suspect you are being imprecise.
----
>  Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL. 
----
I'd be interested to see what evidence you offer for this besides just a
gut feeling. I've seen similar comments but they seem to be spouted by
people who simply don't know anything empirically. I haven't seen that
comment made by anyone from Red Hat but perhaps you have and can point
out a link to me.
----
>   Samba, apache, Open
>  Office, Gnome, and KDE are just applications running on top of the
>  latest version of the Linux OS. Which packages you install determines
>  whether your machine is a server, a desktop, or a hybrid. 
----
yes, but they aren't necessarily well tested because they tend to be
more bleeding edge
----
>  > I see no problem, your choice of course, how many distributions
> you wish
>  > to run. I would not think, if it was me, that I would run a desktop
>  > distribution as a true server.
>  >
>  > May I ask why you do that? When there are several, many, good server
>  > oriented distributions, run desktop oriented distributions as servers?
>  
>  Please tell me how the kernel, Apache, and Samba packages in the other
>  server distributions are any better than the ones provided with
>  Fedora. 
----
I think that given your knowledge level, you already know the issues
anyway and have concluded that for your purposes, you will choose
something that is newer over that which is considered more stable and
known.

Given SuSE's (Novell) acknowledgment of Microsoft patents contained in
their 'deal', I would never install SuSE - but hey, that's just me.

Craig

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 7:24 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 29, 2007 2:48 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Neither openSuSE nor Fedora are end-all products. Both distributions
>  > make decent servers. However, neither is ready to replace Microsoft's
>  > Windows OS and the applications for that OS. Some day perhaps; just
>  > not today.
>
>
>  I am not familiar openSuSE. But I thought that, from what I have read,
>  that openSuSE was a desktop oriented type distribution. 
Novell Corporation is the principle sponsor of openSUSE. openSUSE has
an enterprise version with full support.

>  > Fedora is fast paced and has fewer restraints on me with
> configuring a
>  > system. I learn many things because of that pace.
>  >
>  > Why do I have to exclusively run one variant of Linux? I have multiple
>  > machines which are multi-booted.
>
>
>  An again Fedora is a desktop oriented distribution. 
Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL. Samba, apache, Open
Office, Gnome, and KDE are just applications running on top of the
latest version of the Linux OS. Which packages you install determines
whether your machine is a server, a desktop, or a hybrid.

>  I see no problem, your choice of course, how many distributions you
> wish
>  to run. I would not think, if it was me, that I would run a desktop
>  distribution as a true server.
>
>  May I ask why you do that? When there are several, many, good server
>  oriented distributions, run desktop oriented distributions as servers? 
Please tell me how the kernel, Apache, and Samba packages in the other
server distributions are any better than the ones provided with
Fedora.

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Paul Shaffer wrote:
>  I started following this thread to maybe gain some insight on the
> (java) ***subject***.
>
>    Have you guys checked the ***subject*** recently?
>
>    Now it has degenerated into a bickering match of unrelated crap.
>
>    Knock it off, boneheads!
>
>    v/r
>
>    Paul 
I agree Paul.

BTW - Nice top post here.

You do know what Bender would say about something such as this? Correct?
 ;-)

- --


  David

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd4I80ACgkQAO0wNI1X4QGMvgCeOLcwDrXG/yZSAGRYFnpzOvnk
> hfIAn1cfkaHynkZTtAOmqn02PGo48jQL
> =0aUY
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Peter Boy]

It's rather a long thread now, but I think we must have the patience to
explain and promote key principles again and again.

Am Samstag, den 29.12.2007, 18:17 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
>  I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the
> reference 
>  version of java.  And why it ships something that executes with the name 
>  java that probably doesn't pass the compatibility tests. 
Simply the wrong questions.

Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora choosed
not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)

And Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with ..." but choosed to
support the development of a truly free alternative which is (rsp. was)
intended to achieve compatibility, but needed time for development and
testing. 

Those who need a reference-compatible version have to install a Java
distribution outside the Fedora repositories. And there are provisions
that you can do that without conflicts with the Fedora (test) version.
So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
parallel. That's the Fedora way.

And regarding the file locations: it is not part of the reference. And
when you engage a search engine of your choice you will find a lot of
discussios in the past about problems with the file layout Sun choosed
to use.


Peter

[Les Mikesell]

David Boles wrote:

> >>> Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro
> for a long time.
> >> Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
> >>
> >> "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
> >> installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
> >> Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
> >> because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
> >> the ISS from Windows 2000.
> >>
> >> ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
> >> included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
> >> not work with XP Home.
> > What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
> > applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either.
>  
>  
>  I really don't know what is normally done. But since XP PRO is a
>  *desktop* install I seriously doubt that "Apache, Samba and a whole host
>  of other applications" would be installed at all let alone by default. 
2000/XP pro are just deliberately crippled versions that limit the 
number of connections to the internal services like file sharing but 
nothing is actually missing.  If you install your own apps or something 
like apache, I'd expect them to provide equal or better performance 
since less resources are allocated to the windows-specific services.

>  Home is a stripped down PRO so I would think, even more, that these
>  would not be defaults. 
Home actually removes components related to domain services and some 
other things.  I don't quite see the point, other than shipping 
something that you won't like bundled with the machine so they get your 
money twice when you upgrade.

>  If I wanted a Windows server I would use Windows 2003 which *is* a
> server. 
Paying extra to uncripple the same code...

>  As for Linux? If I wanted a server I would install RHEL or CentOS or
> one
>  of several other Linux server installations. I would *not* try to run a
>  Linux server system with Fedora. It changes too quickly and too often to
>  bother with in the long run. 
But, if you develop your own code to run on the servers, it might make 
sense to do development on the faster-paced fedora, hoping that your 
development cycle and the next RHEL release coincide so the OS support 
and libraries will be similar in production to what you used.  The point 
here is that they both need to include the same things and provide the 
same services.

> > How did XP Home get into this conversation?
>  
>  XP Home and XP PRO are related. Home is XP without the office networking
>  stuff. Just what the name implies. XP for use by a home user. And you
>  mentioned it. Look about at your quoted section. 
Home implies where I'm at, not what I want to do, so the name doesn't 
make any sense to me.  I don't have quite as many computers at home as 
at the office but...

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Antonio Olivares]

--- Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 16:32 -0600, Les Mikesell
>  wrote:
>  > > You could say the same of the US consitution.
>  > > After all why should the president not be able
>  to cancel elections,
>  > they
>  > > interfere with his freedom to innovate foreign
>  policy.
>  > 
>  > Be careful what you suggest...  The constitution
>  hasn't stopped the 
>  > administration from creating a special class of
>  people who are
>  > permitted 
>  > to invade privacy with no balancing oversight. 
>  I'd expect them to be 
>  > using any information they collect to suit their
>  own agenda.
>  ----
>  It isn't up to the constitution to stop the
>  administration from doing
>  anything. The constitution stipulates 3 purportedly
>  co-equal branches of
>  our government (the executive, legislative and
>  judicial) to provide the
>  checks and balances. Therefore, it's mostly the
>  responsibility of the
>  legislative branch to assert themselves and thus
>  far, they have
>  abdicated, undoubtedly for reasons far too complex
>  to reasonably dissect
>  here.
>  
>  The entire analogy has lost it's way.
>  
>  Craig
>  
>  --  
Craig,

Les has a very strong point here, whether it is liked
or not.  The Patriot Act violates many of the civil
rights that the U.S. Constitution grants.  The
Constitution is a revolving document that can change
at some point and like you said the branches of govt.
should regulate each other.  In his statement, he
pointed out a true statement because of this act,
which many would agree is "Unconstitutional" our
rights have been fscked up at any given time, whenever
someone believes/accuses/hearsay that we are a threat
to the national security.  This reminds me of
"football commercials".  

Coach Dennis Green
"They were who we thought they were", 

Press:
"If you knew who they were, why didn't you stop them?"

Coach Green
"We let them off the hook"

and I'll conclude with Parcell's Quote:

"This conversation is going nowhere"

Regards,

Antonio 


     
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Antonio Olivares]

--- Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 16:32 -0600, Les Mikesell
>  wrote:
>  > > You could say the same of the US consitution.
>  > > After all why should the president not be able
>  to cancel elections,
>  > they
>  > > interfere with his freedom to innovate foreign
>  policy.
>  > 
>  > Be careful what you suggest...  The constitution
>  hasn't stopped the 
>  > administration from creating a special class of
>  people who are
>  > permitted 
>  > to invade privacy with no balancing oversight. 
>  I'd expect them to be 
>  > using any information they collect to suit their
>  own agenda.
>  ----
>  It isn't up to the constitution to stop the
>  administration from doing
>  anything. The constitution stipulates 3 purportedly
>  co-equal branches of
>  our government (the executive, legislative and
>  judicial) to provide the
>  checks and balances. Therefore, it's mostly the
>  responsibility of the
>  legislative branch to assert themselves and thus
>  far, they have
>  abdicated, undoubtedly for reasons far too complex
>  to reasonably dissect
>  here.
>  
>  The entire analogy has lost it's way.
>  
>  Craig
>  
>  --  
Craig,

Les has a very strong point here, whether it is liked
or not.  The Patriot Act violates many of the civil
rights that the U.S. Constitution grants.  The
Constitution is a revolving document that can change
at some point and like you said the branches of govt.
should regulate each other.  In his statement, he
pointed out a true statement because of this act,
which many would agree is "Unconstitutional" our
rights have been fscked up at any given time, whenever
someone believes/accuses/hearsay that we are a threat
to the national security.  This reminds me of
"football commercials".  

Coach Dennis Green
"They were who we thought they were", 

Press:
"If you knew who they were, why didn't you stop them?"

Coach Green
"We let them off the hook"

and I'll conclude with Parcell's Quote:

"This conversation is going nowhere"

Regards,

Antonio 


     
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Ed Greshko]

Ed Greshko wrote:
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>    
> > Ed Greshko wrote:
> >     
> >> Karl Larsen wrote:
> >>  
> >>       
> >>> Les Mikesell wrote:
> >>>    
> >>>         
> >>>> Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>      
> >>>>           
> >>>>>>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the        
>     
> >>>>>>>                 
> >>>    Returning to Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site.
> >>> It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign
> >>> something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.
> >>>
> >>>    I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the
> >>> Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do
> >>> this:
> >>>
> >>> $ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >>>
> >>> but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked
> >>> but on F8 it doesn't.
> >>>
> >>> What have I done wrong?
> >>>
> >>>     
> >>>         
> >> I don't know what you did wrong.  But on my F8 system I did install
> >> Sun's jdk (jdk-6u3-linux-i586.rpm)
> >> and there is /usr/bin/jar.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>   
> >>       
> >    I looked and no /usr/bin/jar but there is a /usr/bin/java which
> > lead to gij which seems to work but not. It did this:
> >
> > [karl@k5di Desktop]$ gij jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >   at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
> > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> > not found in gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader{urls=[file:./],
> > parent=gnu.gcj.runtime.ExtensionClassLoader{urls=[], parent=null}}
> >   at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
> > [karl@k5di Desktop]$
> >
> > It appears that the jedit file may be bad.
> >     
>  Nope...
>
>  java -jar jedit42install.jar
>
>  Works just fine here...
>     
Sorry....  I meant....

java -jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar

> > Geeze
> >     
>  Yes...but for a different reason.  :-)
>    
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >     
>
>
>     

-- 
Why does Sea World have a seafood restaurant? I'm halfway through my
fish burger and I realize, Oh my gosh....I could be eating a slow learner.

[Karl Larsen]

Cameron Simpson wrote:
>  On 01Jan2008 09:10, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com&gt; wrote:
>    
> >> If you are doing a default x86 Sun JDK install, you will find the
> >> distributables in /usr/java/jdk.../bin directory. If you are using Java
> >> 6 then you should also see /usr/java/default and /usr/java/latest
> >> symlinks pointing to the Java6 directory.
> >>
> >> You could add /usr/java/default/bin to your path (either by modifying
> >> /etc/profile file, or in any other file that you use to setup your
> >> environment)
> >>
> >> Now, you should be able to run whatever command that you wanted to run:
> >> 	java -jar XYZ.jar
> >>
> >> Rogue
> >>   
> >>       
> > Hi Rogue, I would never guessed the above. Turns out you need to be using a 
> > root login.
> >     
>
>  No, you should _not_ have to be root. In fact, you should try quite hard
>  to avoid being root when not doing system administration.
>
>  | But I have the jEdit installed but now reading the man page to 
>    
> > see how to do it :-)
> >     
>
>  Always a good start.
>
>    
> > Thank you so much. I was sure that having no /usr/bin/jar meant I did 
> > something wrong. But the new stuff takes new ways. Thanks a lot!
> >     
>
>  The other thing you should bear in mind is that "jar" is a tool like
> "ar",
>  "tar" or "zip" - it constructs, inspects or unpacks ".jar"
> files.
>
>  To _run_ a java program you want the "java" command.
>
>  Usually a Java app is distributed as a jar file, an archive containing the
>  program, and the command "java -jar foo.jar" is used to run it.
>
>  You still need "java" in your $PATH, or to invoke "java" explicitly
> (eg
>  "/usr/java/bin/java") if it is not in your $PATH. Usually it is desirable to
>  adjust your $PATH you include this stuff, saving painful long paths later.
>
>  Both "java" and "jar" have manual pages, quite good ones. If java in
>  installed out of the "vendor" area (here "vendor" means
> redhat/fedora
>  and "/usr/bin" is part of their area - that they expect a free hand
>  in), you will need to adjust your $MANPATH to include the "..../man"
>  directory of wherever the java package is installed, much as you have to
>  adjust $PATH to include the "..../bin" directory to run "java"
> without
>  using the full path of the command.
>
>  Cheers,
>     
    OK I am finding this at /usr/java/:

[root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java
default  jre1.6.0_03  latest

Now default and /usr/java/jrel.6.0_03/ are identical and have this:

[root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/
bin        javaws  LICENSE  plugin  THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.txt
COPYRIGHT  lib     man      README  Welcome.html
[root@k5di ~]#

    My experiance to date is that using $ java -jar filename.jar works 
but other problems crop up. Also I have no man java. So it is not in the 
searchpath for man packages. How do I fix that?

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Karl Larsen]

Cameron Simpson wrote:
>  On 02Jan2008 12:53, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com&gt; wrote:
>    
> > Cameron Simpson wrote:
> >     
> >> The other thing you should bear in mind is that "jar" is a tool like
> "ar",
> >> "tar" or "zip" - it constructs, inspects or unpacks
> ".jar" files.
> >>
> >> To _run_ a java program you want the "java" command.
> >>
> >> Usually a Java app is distributed as a jar file, an archive containing the
> >> program, and the command "java -jar foo.jar" is used to run it.
> >>
> >> You still need "java" in your $PATH, or to invoke "java"
> explicitly (eg
> >> "/usr/java/bin/java") if it is not in your $PATH. Usually it is
> desirable to
> >> adjust your $PATH you include this stuff, saving painful long paths later.
> >>
> >> Both "java" and "jar" have manual pages, quite good ones. If
> java in
> >> installed out of the "vendor" area (here "vendor" means
> redhat/fedora
> >> and "/usr/bin" is part of their area - that they expect a free hand
> >> in), you will need to adjust your $MANPATH to include the "..../man"
> >> directory of wherever the java package is installed, much as you have to
> >> adjust $PATH to include the "..../bin" directory to run
> "java" without
> >> using the full path of the command.
> >>   
> >>       
> >    OK I am finding this at /usr/java/:
> >
> > [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java
> > default  jre1.6.0_03  latest
> >
> > Now default
> >     
>        ^^^^^^^
>  I am not sure what you mean at this ^^^ point.
>  Unless "default" is a symbolic link that points at "jre1.6.0_03".
>  The "ls -l /usr/java/" command will show this.
>
>    
> > and /usr/java/jrel.6.0_03/ are identical and have this:
> >
> > [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/
> > bin        javaws  LICENSE  plugin  THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.txt
> > COPYRIGHT  lib     man      README  Welcome.html
> > [root@k5di ~]#
> >
> >    My experiance to date is that using $ java -jar filename.jar works but 
> > other problems crop up. Also I have no man java. So it is not in the 
> > searchpath for man packages. How do I fix that?
> >     
>
>  As mentioned, you want to update your $PATH and $MANPATH.
>  Looking at your output above I would suggest running these shell
>  commands:
>
>    PATH=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/bin:$PATH
>    MANPATH=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/man:$MANPATH
>    export PATH MANPATH
>
>  The other thing that java tends to like is the $JAVA_HOME variable.
>  You might usefull do this instead:
>
>    JAVA_HOME=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03
>    PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH
>    MANPATH=$JAVA_HOME/man:$MANPATH
>    export JAVA_HOME PATH MANPATH
>
>  The see if "man java" produces a manual page. (Be warning, it's a very
>  long manual page!) Also see if "java -jar filename.jar" now behaves
>  better.
>
>  Cheers,
>     
    I did your calls but I made then to /usr/java/default/man for 
example because default will become the latest java unpacked on your 
computer. All I did yeaterday makes the downloaded java work.

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Les Mikesell]

Lamar Owen wrote:

> >> Better, though, is
> >> that the manufacturer of my FireGL V3100 is releasing the source so that
> >> it can be integrated upstream, helping everyone.
>  
> > Maybe - do you expect the people who don't care about the trouble they
> > are causing you now to do any better once they are in complete control?
>  
>  Uh, Les, you're sounding paranoid.  Who are 'they' and over what do
> 'they' 
>  have complete control?  
The ones who keep breaking binary modules so you have to pay RH et.al. 
to keep a machine working (or wait for the clones).  And yes, I am 
paranoid about this - enough not to run linux on a lot of machines where 
vendor-supplied drivers and another OS are more reliable.

>  ; he was then and still is a gentlemen, as most of 
>  the kernel developers (and Fedora packagers!) are if treated with the respect 
>  that they have earned, and not with a 'I want this so you must give it to me 
>  this way bwahaha!' attitude. 
It's not a matter of whether anyone must give me something or not, I 
just won't run Linux where it keeps breaking and I'm not convinced that 
anyone can do better at drivers than the vendors that build the hardware.

>  In the ideal case, I would run a test case on my code, and then get
> back to 
>  the IcedTea devs with a thorough bug report.  It hasn't been important enough 
>  yet to go to that trouble, nor have I been able to justify it in a business 
>  sense.  But, since I can have the Sun Java and IcedTea installed at the same 
>  time, and switch between them easily with alternatives (and I don't find 
>  alternatives to be too bizarre, given what it is really doing),  
It's a multitasking machine - you should be able to run both at once 
(and you can, if you can find them).

>  You do realize that OpenJDK IS the Sun Java of the future, right,
> Les? 
Yes, but would you try to drive the car of the future while it still has 
some parts missing?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

> >> Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the
> point that
> >> people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
> >> Windows.
> > Errr... What universe are you in?  That's the problem I'd really like to 
> > see solved - and the reason I keep harping about usability (and GPL) 
> > problems.
>  ----
>  I'm not having any problems. Are you having problems? All I see is you
>  trying to score some ethereal point. 
You don't have to deal with Windows regularly on your networks?  Free 
software fanaticism at the expense of usability is hardly an ethereal 
point - it is what keeps the monopoly in business.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 10:42 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  
>  >>>>>   
>  >>>>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small 
>  >>>> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
>  >>>> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
>  >>>> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow 
>  >>>> the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work. 
>  >>>> Look at my new messages on java.
>  >>> ----
>  >>> nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.
>  >> On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of java
>
>  >> on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be right 
>  >> that it shouldn't be that way...
>  > ----
>  > ROFLMAO!!!
>  > 
>  > Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the point that
>  > people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
>  > Windows.
>  
>  Errr... What universe are you in?  That's the problem I'd really like to 
>  see solved - and the reason I keep harping about usability (and GPL) 
>  problems. 
----
I'm not having any problems. Are you having problems? All I see is you
trying to score some ethereal point.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

> >>>>   
> >>>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small 
> >>> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
> >>> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
> >>> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow 
> >>> the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work. 
> >>> Look at my new messages on java.
> >> ----
> >> nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.
> > On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of java 
> > on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be right 
> > that it shouldn't be that way...
>  ----
>  ROFLMAO!!!
>  
>  Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the point that
>  people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
>  Windows. 
Errr... What universe are you in?  That's the problem I'd really like to 
see solved - and the reason I keep harping about usability (and GPL) 
problems.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
> >>   
> >     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small 
> > java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
> > broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
> > tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow 
> > the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work. 
> > Look at my new messages on java.
>  ----
>  nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about. 
On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of java 
on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be right 
that it shouldn't be that way...

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Karl Larsen]

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>
> > ----
> > openNMS isn't packaged or distributed with Fedora is it?
>
>  No, I'm not interested in being restricted to the subset of programs 
>  that are included in a distribution.  Are you?
>
> > ----
> >>> 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's more than luck.  It's a miracle if that happened after just 
>  installing Sun's RPM.
>
> > ----
> >>  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
> > ----
>
>  Ummm, somehow I'd expect a package named 
>  java-1.5.0-sun-1.5.0.13-1jpp.1.el5.i586.rpm to have the jpackage style 
>  additions that RH makes necessary instead of being the stock Sun rpm.
>
> > 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.
>
>  It's not completely impossible to make it work but not trivial and I 
>  think you have to admit that you aren't an average user.
>
> > ----
> >> 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.
>
>  Yes, that's a generic complaint that the packagers don't give a crap 
>  if anyone else's stuff works or about cooperating with anyone else.  
>  Your comment seems to imply that should be assumed and accepted.
>
> > 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.
>
>  No, but historically if something is broken in fedora, it will be 
>  equally broken for the next 7 years when the RH cut happens.  They 
>  fixed the brokenness after the fact in RHEL5 with the package I 
>  pointed out, but CentOS doesn't carry it and fedora users don't get it.
>
>
> > 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.
>
>  You can install it separately if you want, but their yum repository 
>  includes the jdk.  Click/install the appropriate yum config from
>  http://yum.opennms.org/ (you'll want the 'unstable' version). Then 
>  'yum install opennms' to get everything and you are up to the 
>  'Configure OpenNMS' heading on 
>  http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Installation:Yum.
>
>  A few minutes compared to several weeks of looking for jpackage'd SUN 
>  instructions before that - Oh, and the CentOS5 tomcat didn't work with 
>  the Sun JDK until an update a few months after release because the 
>  jars were built with the broken included java - apparently RH fixed 
>  theirs somewhat earlier but Centos didn't catch it.  This version 
>  doesn't need tomcat but the earlier ones did.
>
> > By the way, I've been using Zenoss which appears to be similar to
> > OpenNMS...have you any comparison to offer?
>
>  Haven't used Zenoss, but OpenNMS compares favorably to anything I've 
>  ever seen in terms of autodiscovery and assuming that you have enough 
>  machines that you don't want to see them all on the screen at once. It 
>  auto-discovers services and notifies you when they stop, and graphs 
>  interface/cpu/memory/disk SNMP values with sensible defaults. 
>  Considering the huge framework underneath it, I'm impressed by the 
>  current rapid development without breaking anything.  As an example of 
>  what it can do, if you enable link discovery and have snmp on your 
>  switches it will show what devices are connected to each switch port. 
>  It can do maps, but that's not a real strong point.  It's better at 
>  consolidating the problems on a viewable screen and doing 
>  notifications on errors and thresholds.  It's weak link is that some 
>  of the configuration still has to be done by editing xml files 
>  although each revision moves more control into the web interface.  I'm 
>  also impressed by the ability to grab the svn source and rebuild a 
>  trunk snapshot with the build script pulling in all of the components 
>  you need.
>
> > ----
> >> 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
>
>  64 bit java and flash (both are supposed to work in Solaris), and 
>  probably others.
>
> > ----
> >> 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.
>
>  So which one is perfect? There's nothing particularly mac-specific in 
>  the problems of connecting inbound through NAT routers. At least Apple 
>  doesn't just say 'you can't have it because its license isn't 
>  restrictive enough to be called free'.  And they don't go out of their 
>  way to make their system difficult to use with 3rd party programs - 
>  mostly, anyway.
>  
    I recall getting java from Sun because Open Office said it would not 
work well without it. So spent part of a day getting it working BECAUSE 
FEDORA DOES NOT PLAN FOR A USER TO TO THIS, BUT COULD, and finally got 
the little man in the box to jump around on the web page.

    Went to Open Office and tried all of them and really can't say I saw 
any difference. So either I can't see what it did or it didn't do much.

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 17:46 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  
>  > then again, I did install the jpackage too and was able to integrate it
>  > without any fuss but again, this was on EL not Fedora.
>  > 
>  > The implementation path is now well understood and I installed the same
>  > JDK/Jpackage for my Fedora 8 desktop since I do Ruby on Rails
>  > development on my desktop and run the Ruby-Java-Bridge there. It workee
>  > nicely.
>  
>  I did it that way on CentOS4, but couldn't find jpackage repositories 
>  for EL5, or fedora 7 or 8. Are those hidden somewhere? 
---
http://jpackage.org/yum.php
or for the impatient...
wget \
ftp://jpackage.hmdc.harvard.edu/JPackage/1.7/generic/RPMS.non-free/java-1...
----
>  > ----
>  > yeah, it's a bear to have to 'yum install java-1.6.0-sun-compat'
>  > ;-)
>  
>  I think you omitted a step or three here.  If that worked out of the box 
>  on fedora or centos I wouldn't have a complaint. But on an FC6, "yum 
>  search sun-compat" says No Matches found. 
----
it would if you don't have jpackage repository configured...see above
----
>  > No, Apple has perfected the notion of re-selling you the same
> software
>  > over and over again, ahem, Leopard, iWork and my current favorite story
>  > of Apple saying FU to their customers...BootCamp (we told you all along
>  > it was Beta...too bad it expired and now you have to pay to upgrade).
>  
>  At least you can pay them and get what you want (and time machine is 
>  kind of cute).  With Linux they just say you can't ever have it (zfs) or 
>  you install dozens and dozens of kernels hoping one will finally work 
>  (firewire, etc.). 
----
paying scum suckers that give you free software that dies so that you
have to purchase an upgrade that actually doesn't have the date time
bomb has been a personal vexation from me ever since the days when BPI
sold accounting software written in BASIC. Something about companies
that use drug dealers as role models...

Viva le choice

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:
> > I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the
> reference 
> > version of java. 
>  
>  It follows the Linux Standards Base and thus the FHS standard for where
>  files go. 
Does the FHS dictate symlinks pointing to symlinks and executables under 
/usr/lib?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Cameron Simpson]

On 02Jan2008 12:53, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com&gt; wrote:
>  Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > The other thing you should bear in mind is that "jar" is a tool like
> "ar",
> > "tar" or "zip" - it constructs, inspects or unpacks
> ".jar" files.
> >
> > To _run_ a java program you want the "java" command.
> >
> > Usually a Java app is distributed as a jar file, an archive containing the
> > program, and the command "java -jar foo.jar" is used to run it.
> >
> > You still need "java" in your $PATH, or to invoke "java"
> explicitly (eg
> > "/usr/java/bin/java") if it is not in your $PATH. Usually it is desirable
> to
> > adjust your $PATH you include this stuff, saving painful long paths later.
> >
> > Both "java" and "jar" have manual pages, quite good ones. If java
> in
> > installed out of the "vendor" area (here "vendor" means
> redhat/fedora
> > and "/usr/bin" is part of their area - that they expect a free hand
> > in), you will need to adjust your $MANPATH to include the "..../man"
> > directory of wherever the java package is installed, much as you have to
> > adjust $PATH to include the "..../bin" directory to run "java"
> without
> > using the full path of the command.
> >   
>     OK I am finding this at /usr/java/:
>
>  [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java
>  default  jre1.6.0_03  latest
>
>  Now default 
      ^^^^^^^
I am not sure what you mean at this ^^^ point.
Unless "default" is a symbolic link that points at "jre1.6.0_03".
The "ls -l /usr/java/" command will show this.

>  and /usr/java/jrel.6.0_03/ are identical and have this:
>
>  [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/
>  bin        javaws  LICENSE  plugin  THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.txt
>  COPYRIGHT  lib     man      README  Welcome.html
>  [root@k5di ~]#
>
>     My experiance to date is that using $ java -jar filename.jar works but 
>  other problems crop up. Also I have no man java. So it is not in the 
>  searchpath for man packages. How do I fix that? 
As mentioned, you want to update your $PATH and $MANPATH.
Looking at your output above I would suggest running these shell
commands:

  PATH=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/bin:$PATH
  MANPATH=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/man:$MANPATH
  export PATH MANPATH

The other thing that java tends to like is the $JAVA_HOME variable.
You might usefull do this instead:

  JAVA_HOME=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03
  PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH
  MANPATH=$JAVA_HOME/man:$MANPATH
  export JAVA_HOME PATH MANPATH

The see if "man java" produces a manual page. (Be warning, it's a very
long manual page!) Also see if "java -jar filename.jar" now behaves
better.

Cheers,
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs(a)zip.com.au&gt; DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

Every technical corrigendum is met by an equally troublesome new defect report.
        - Norman Diamond <diamond(a)jit.dec.com&gt;

[Les Mikesell]

Peter Boy wrote:

> >> Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible
> with..." but Fedora choosed
> >> not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
> > They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it 
> > difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one 
> > problem.  
>  
>  Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. 
Let's see - if a sort-of unix compatible system installed a file called 
/bin/sh that would not execute shell scripts, would you consider that 
making things difficult?  How's that different from one named 
/usr/bin/java that won't execute java bytecode?

>  You may install the Sun
>  provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
>  doesn't work out of the box  
It does work out of the box, it just won't execute on fedora when you 
type java.

>  As with any distributions
>  Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution. 
That may well be true of fedora.  It is certainly a problem for users if 
  it is.  I wouldn't extend that claim to other distributions.

>  And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat
> takes care
>  about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. 
How does that work, when the jpackage version of the same thing was 
free?  And why does jpackage support only go to FC6?

> > A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to
> fix 
> > this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the 
> > distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal 
> > symlinks.
>  
>  You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
>  for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
>  Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
>  specific one. 
Symlinks pointing to symlinks with executables under /user/lib doesn't 
seem bizarre to you?  And you don't think Sun knows how java should work?

> > The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java
> compatable 
> >   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an 
> > incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name 
> > and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java 
> > program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and 
> > shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm 
> > surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>  
>  The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
>  scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
>  the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
>  intermediate state during development. All this is quite different. 
The only difference is the length of time they have continued to ship 
something that, when you type 'java', doesn't execute a java compatible 
program.  And please don't try to tell me that the fact that this 
damages the usefulness of java bothers anyone involved.

> >> So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference
> version and
> >> you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
> >> parallel. That's the Fedora way.
> > It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
>  
>  You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
>  have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways. 
I'd just like some truth-in-advertising here.  Don't call it java until 
it is - and realize it is just as damaging as if would be if someone 
replaced your /bin/sh with an incompatible replacement.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Karl Larsen]

Peter Boy wrote:
>  Am Sonntag, den 30.12.2007, 12:49 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
>    
> > It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of this 
> > choice instead of blindly defending it.
> >     
>  As with most decisions in real life: most benefits in one dimension have
>  drawbacks in others. If I want the freedom of free software, I may have
>  to struggle with issues in using non-free software. It is simply a
>  matter of choice (and conscious decision).
>
>    
> >> Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora
> choosed
> >> not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
> >>       
> > They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it 
> > difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one 
> > problem.  
> >     
>
>  Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. You may install the Sun
>  provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
>  doesn't work out of the box (doesn't work in any Linux distribution, the
>  bug report is some years old and Sun choosed not to fix it), install one
>  of the suggested workarounds (e.g. edit a shell script
>  in /etc/profile.d) and you are ready to go. As with any distributions
>  Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution.
>  Third party vendors have to care ybout their software.
>
>  And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat takes care
>  about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. Or the
>  former SuSE distribution where SuSE made a different regarding the
>  licence issue.
>
>    
> > A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix 
> > this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the 
> > distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal 
> > symlinks.
> >     
>
>  You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
>  for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
>  Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
>  specific one.
>
>
>    
> > The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable 
> >   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an 
> > incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name 
> > and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java 
> > program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and 
> > shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm 
> > surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
> >     
>
>  The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
>  scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
>  the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
>  intermediate state during development. All this is quite different.
>
>
>    
> >> So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
> >> you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
> >> parallel. That's the Fedora way.
> >>       
> > It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
> >     
>
>  You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
>  have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways.
>
>
>  Peter
>
>     
    You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small 
java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow 
the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work. 
Look at my new messages on java.

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Ed Greshko]

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Peter Boy wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 30.12.2007, 12:49 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
> >  
> >> It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of
> >> this choice instead of blindly defending it.
> >>     
> > As with most decisions in real life: most benefits in one dimension have
> > drawbacks in others. If I want the freedom of free software, I may have
> > to struggle with issues in using non-free software. It is simply a
> > matter of choice (and conscious decision).
> >
> >  
> >>> Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora
> >>> choosed
> >>> not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
> >>>       
> >> They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making
> >> it difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy
> >> is one problem.      
> >
> > Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. You may install the Sun
> > provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
> > doesn't work out of the box (doesn't work in any Linux distribution, the
> > bug report is some years old and Sun choosed not to fix it), install one
> > of the suggested workarounds (e.g. edit a shell script
> > in /etc/profile.d) and you are ready to go. As with any distributions
> > Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution.
> > Third party vendors have to care ybout their software.
> >
> > And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat takes care
> > about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. Or the
> > former SuSE distribution where SuSE made a different regarding the
> > licence issue.
> >
> >  
> >> A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix this
> >> problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the
> >> distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal
> >> symlinks.
> >>     
> >
> > You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
> > for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
> > Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
> > specific one.
> >
> >
> >  
> >> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java
> >> compatable   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried
> >> to promote an incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda
> >> with the java name and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The
> >> fedora-shipped not-java program that executes with the java name
> >> does just as much damage and shouldn't be named java until it passes
> >> the compatibility tests.  I'm surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed
> >> this abuse of a trademarked name.
> >>     
> >
> > The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
> > scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
> > the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
> > intermediate state during development. All this is quite different.
> >
> >
> >  
> >>> So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
> >>> you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
> >>> parallel. That's the Fedora way.
> >>>       
> >> It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
> >>     
> >
> > You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
> > have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways.
> >
> >
> > Peter
> >
> >   
>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small
>  java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that
>  broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the
>  tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow
>  the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work.
>  Look at my new messages on java.
>  
I still don't understand a word of what you think you are saying..... 
Try again, in English.

-- 
"More software projects have gone awry for lack of calendar time than
for all other causes combined." -- Fred Brooks, Jr., _The Mythical Man
Month_

[Les Mikesell]

Lamar Owen wrote:

> >> Have you run any tests against icedtea?  Which specific ones
> failed? 
> >> Were bugs filed in bugzilla about them?
> > No, I don't see the point of replacing something that works with
> > something not already proven to be better.
>  
>  What is 'better'?  Sorry, I know that sounds like splitting hairs, but there 
>  is no way of proving something is 'better' (in the most amorphous sense of 
>  that already amorphous word) without releasing it.  
If you can't measure it, you can't improve it.  And if you haven't 
measured it, why, if you release it, should someone install it?

>  That's why you have 
>  alternatives, and that's why the system is an open one.  That's why it is a 
>  built-in possibility to replace the provided java infrastructure with the Sun 
>  one. 
I don't understand how a bizarre and mostly undocumented series of 
symlinks pointing to symlinks 'builds in' the possibility to replace 
things.  Did 'rm' stop working?

>  So why don't you run the tests and see how good or how bad it is,
> rather than 
>  wasting time griping about something that isn't going to change unless and 
>  until Sun releases under a redistributable (by Fedora) license?
>  
> > So you do understand the damage that shipping incompatible versions
> > causes...
>  
>  Of course I do.  But I also understand the reasons that IcedTea is in F8 
>  instead of a Sun java.  I also understand that it is not hard to get a Sun 
>  java into F8 (once a few things are worked around, and the systems provided 
>  in F8 are used).
>  
> > Even Sun could have done a better job with versioning the code and
> > providing backwards compatibility.
>  
>  And that's the point: java compatibility issues are not isolated to IcedTea or 
>  gcj. 
But they are compounded by additional versions with no standards 
verification.

> >> Ever try a real Korn shell on different platforms?
> > I used it on AT&T sysvr4, but only with Bourne-compatible syntax since I
> > didn't expect it to be available everywhere.
>  
>  I mention the real Korn shell since it is even available for F8; also on 
>  Solaris, HP-UX, and others.  Particularly since Bash is not a Bourne shell 
>  (strictly speaking), I use as an example a shell that can be used to isolate 
>  compatibility differences to things outside the shell itself.
>  
> >> You'd hate that system;
> >> depending upon the setting of an environment variable, you had different
> >> shells, different sets of programs, and different behaviors (SysV, BSD,
> >> or Aegis).
>  
> > Did any of the settings fail with Bourne-compatible syntax? 
>  
>  Yes, since the default behavior (of the version I had) was to make the 
>  c-shell /bin/sh if in BSD mode, and the Bourne shell /bin/sh if in SysV mode; 
>  a shell script could change the environment variable within itself, then 
>  morph from a Bourne script to a csh script, then change the envvar back and 
>  resume processing as a Bourne script.   
Yes, you were right - I hated anything that made csh a default shell.

>  Yes, that is very broken, but it was the case on the DN3500 with
> DomainOS 10.2 
>  (with AutoCAD on it; that was why the machine existed) I worked on.  The 
>  $PATH had the envvar embedded in various paths; the default /bin 
>  (and /usr/bin) was a variably symlinked (yes, an embedded envvar inside the 
>  symlink!) directory, with three possible targets: one the SysVR3-compatible 
>  one, one the 4.3BSD-compatible one, and one the Aegis (the previous Apollo 
>  environment) one.  Oh, and Apollo DomainOS had a great gui, but it wasn't X11 
>  (which had to be added separately): instead of xterms, you had what were 
>  known as 'pads' which are much like xterms of serious steroids.  It was a big 
>  enough target that AutoDesk built for it (in the late 1980's).
>  
>  People who complain that Linux distribution differences are like the old unix 
>  war-era differences don't know what they're talking about; Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, 
>  Fedora, etc are all much more alike than they are different; the various 
>  competing Unixen of the late 80's and early 90's were more different than 
>  they were alike.  Even in the case of SCO Unix versus SCO Xenix; same 
>  company, quite different Unix variants (Xenix, of course, being the 
>  Microsoft-licensed Unix derivative sold to the old SCO). 
Still, if you can't run the same binaries, scripts, and java-bytecode 
across them, it doesn't matter that they share a tux logo somewhere.

-- 
    Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Ed Greshko]

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Les Mikesell wrote:
> > Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >
> >>>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the 
>     Returning to Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site.
>  It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign
>  something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.
>
>     I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the
>  Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do
>  this:
>
>  $ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>
>  but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked
>  but on F8 it doesn't.
>
>  What have I done wrong?
>  
I don't know what you did wrong.  But on my F8 system I did install
Sun's jdk (jdk-6u3-linux-i586.rpm)
and there is /usr/bin/jar.




-- 
I'm mentally OVERDRAWN! What's that SIGNPOST up ahead? Where's ROD
STERLING when you really need him?

[Lamar Owen]

On Monday 31 December 2007, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Alan Cox wrote:
>  >>> Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any contributions
>  >>> under a licence that makes them free.
>  >>
>  >> You mean restricted, don't you?
>  >
>  > If you are at the point where you conclude that people type the reverse
>  > of the word they mean you have serious problems. 
Gentlemen, please take this off-list.  Les, you're not going to change any 
minds.  As much as I would like a simple ABI stability in the kernel, it's 
not in my hands, and bellyaching about it anywhere except LKML is not going 
to help any.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Les Mikesell]

Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:

> >> you can run ZFS AND not have to deal with messy GPL
> kernel...it's called
> >> Open Solaris
> > Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral
> > nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be
> > available for any use.
> >
>  So, use the drivers from the hardware manufacture. The authors of
>  the Linux drivers have the right to decide how there work is used. 
No they don't.  The only way to contribute code to a GPL'd project is 
under the GPL.

>  I
>  don't hear you complaining that the Windows drivers can not be used,
>  but there are even more restrictive - you can not even look at the
>  code. 
NDISwrapper sort-of, sometimes works.

>  Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the fact
>  that the license prevents you from hijacking the code. 
I'm not interested in hijacking anything.  I just want to be able to use 
code that everyone has been given permission to use but not to 
redistribute in creative, usable forms.  And since it can't be 
distributed that way, it effectively can't be used.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Mikkel]

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
> >
> > you can run ZFS AND not have to deal with messy GPL kernel...it's called
> > Open Solaris
>  
>  Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral
>  nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be
>  available for any use.
>   
So, use the drivers from the hardware manufacture. The authors of
the Linux drivers have the right to decide how there work is used. I
don't hear you complaining that the Windows drivers can not be used,
but there are even more restrictive - you can not even look at the
code. Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the fact
that the license prevents you from hijacking the code.

Mikkel
-- 

  Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

[Alan Cox]

>  > Open Solaris
>  
>  Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral 
>  nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be 
>  available for any use. 
Strange use of the word "hijack". The licence was decided by the code
author, so it would be like saying someone hijacked their own car. The
licence, if anything, stops Sun hijacking their work.

Alan

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
>  ----
> > Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL.
>  ----
>  I'd be interested to see what evidence you offer for this besides just a
>  gut feeling. I've seen similar comments but they seem to be spouted by
>  people who simply don't know anything empirically. I haven't seen that
>  comment made by anyone from Red Hat but perhaps you have and can point
>  out a link to me. 
Go through the fedora mail list archives and note how the system 
stabilizes and complaints stop a few months before a new RHEL release. 
Then compare the program versions in the RHEL release to what fedora 
users were running.  You'll find a couple of surprises out of the 
thousands of packages.  RHEL4 including mysql5 would be a notable 
difference to the FC3 contemporary; adding the Sun jdk to RHEL4/5 
updates after the release would be another.  And look at the problems 
mentioned on the mail list as major changes begin again in the following 
fedora version.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 8:40 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 29, 2007 7:24 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Novell Corporation is the principle sponsor of openSUSE. openSUSE has
>  > an enterprise version with full support.
>
>
>  Yeah. I think that I remember now. They have a 'free' and a 'buy me'
>  edition right? 
Yes. The "buy me" includes a manual and some level of support. (Red
Hat drop such offerings and switched to Fedora.) Novell, offers
enterprise versions under the SUSE brand: http://www.novell.com/linux/

>  > Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL. Samba, apache, Open
>  > Office, Gnome, and KDE are just applications running on top of the
>  > latest version of the Linux OS. Which packages you install determines
>  > whether your machine is a server, a desktop, or a hybrid.
>
>
>  i will let the "Fedora  people' respond to that. I am sure that you will
>  disagree with what they have to say here.
>
>
>  > Please tell me how the kernel, Apache, and Samba packages in the other
>  > server distributions are any better than the ones provided with
>  > Fedora.
>
>
>  Only that 'distributions' such as RHEL, or CentOS, or others like them
>  *are* server oriented. Fedora 8, for example, is obviously a desktop
>  type distribution. You did notice that apache is not on the DVD did you not?
>
>  I did not say that packages were different or better. but if I was going
>  to setup a server I would *use* a server installation. Linux, or
>  Microsoft, or Mac.
>
>  I would not expect Windows XP Home/pro to be a server installation for
>  example. I would expect RHEL to be a server. Understand? 
Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.

>  - --
>    David

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 8:39 PM, Craig White <craigwhite(a)azapple.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 20:20 -0800, Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 29, 2007 7:24 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  > > Hash: SHA1
>  > >
>  > > Kam Leo wrote:
>  > > > On Dec 29, 2007 2:48 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > > >
>  > > > Neither openSuSE nor Fedora are end-all products. Both distributions
>  > > > make decent servers. However, neither is ready to replace Microsoft's
>  > > > Windows OS and the applications for that OS. Some day perhaps; just
>  > > > not today.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > I am not familiar openSuSE. But I thought that, from what I have read,
>  > > that openSuSE was a desktop oriented type distribution.
>  >
>  > Novell Corporation is the principle sponsor of openSUSE. openSUSE has
>  > an enterprise version with full support.
>  ----
>  I am not knowledgeable here but what I see on
>  http://en.opensuse.org/Welcome_to_openSUSE.org
>  says "openSUSE also provides the base for Novell's award-winning SUSE
>  Linux Enterprise products" which has an entirely different meaning. I
>  suspect you are being imprecise. 
Perhaps.Novell's offerings: http://www.novell.com/linux/

>  ----
>  > Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL.
>  ----
>  I'd be interested to see what evidence you offer for this besides just a
>  gut feeling. I've seen similar comments but they seem to be spouted by
>  people who simply don't know anything empirically. I haven't seen that
>  comment made by anyone from Red Hat but perhaps you have and can point
>  out a link to me. 
Check sponsorship for Fedora. Red Hat tried to make Fedora a
stand-a-lone, non-profit, entity and failed.

>  ----
>  >  Samba, apache, Open
>  > Office, Gnome, and KDE are just applications running on top of the
>  > latest version of the Linux OS. Which packages you install determines
>  > whether your machine is a server, a desktop, or a hybrid.
>  ----
>  yes, but they aren't necessarily well tested because they tend to be
>  more bleeding edge 
Any distribution using the 2.6 kernel is more bleeding edge than one
running the 2.4 based kernel.

>  ----
>  > > I see no problem, your choice of course, how many distributions you wish
>  > > to run. I would not think, if it was me, that I would run a desktop
>  > > distribution as a true server.
>  > >
>  > > May I ask why you do that? When there are several, many, good server
>  > > oriented distributions, run desktop oriented distributions as servers?
>  >
>  > Please tell me how the kernel, Apache, and Samba packages in the other
>  > server distributions are any better than the ones provided with
>  > Fedora.
>  ----
>  I think that given your knowledge level, you already know the issues
>  anyway and have concluded that for your purposes, you will choose
>  something that is newer over that which is considered more stable and
>  known. 
If I were using a server in a production environment I would use
something like BSD or RHEL My usage is strictly in a
testing/evaluation environment and I'm free to try whatever I like.

>  Given SuSE's (Novell) acknowledgment of Microsoft patents
> contained in
>  their 'deal', I would never install SuSE - but hey, that's just me.
>
>  Craig
>
>
>  --
>  fedora-list mailing list
>  fedora-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>

[Knute Johnson]

> On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 16:40 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
> > >On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:04 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
> > >> >> Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on
> both 32 
> > >> >> and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
> > >> >> plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work
> with the 
> > >> >> 32bit version.
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> > >> >----
> > >> >I agree with the following notations...
> > >> >
> > >> >you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
> > >> >the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
> > >> >jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages
> such
> > >> >as the compaat-libstdc++-33
> > >> 
> > >> I works if you do it after, I never tried before.
> > >> 
> > >> >Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
> > >> >JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
> > >> >for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This
> of
> > >> >course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a
> users
> > >> >$PATH.
> > >> 
> > >> If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
> > >> the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation.
> > >----
> > >docbook-XSL for xalan/xerces/fop etc. Otherwise, you have to locate them
> > >with each call.
> > >
> > >Probably others too...
> > 
> > Sorry, I have no idea what that means.
> ----
> that means that executing a java command such as this...
>
> java org.apache.xalan.xslt.Process \
>   -out some_output_file.html \
>   -in some_input_file.xml \
>   -xsl /var/www/html/docbook/docbook.xsl \
>   -param use.extentions 1
>
> or this...
>
> java \
>   -Djavax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory=\
>      org.apache.xerces.jaxp.DocumentBuilderFactoryImpl \
>   -Djavax.xml.parsers.SAXParserFactory=\
>      org.apache.xerces.jaxp.SAXParserFactoryImpl \
>   com.icl.saxon.StyleSheet \
>   -o myfile.html \
>   some_input_file.xml \
>   /var/www/html/docbook/docbook.xsl \
>   use.extensions=1
>
> only works if the full path to xalan.jar/xerces.jar/saxon.jar are
> located in $CLASSPATH environmental variable, otherwise, you have to
> spell it out longhand with path within your usage command each time you
> invoke it. It is Java's equivalent to the shell $PATH variable.
>
> As you start to amass jar files, it can be really useful to manage them
> with a CLASSPATH declaration. I'm presuming that is what most
> applications such as a Tomcat or Alfreso are going to do (I gather they
> build it on the fly based upon jar files in particular directories). 
Could be and in the case you cite using the enviroment variable makes 
a lot of sense.  Users that are not that experienced seem to have 
more trouble with the environment variable than without it.  It is 
one of the tricky parts of Java.

-- 
Knute Johnson
Molon Labe...

[Knute Johnson]

> Craig White wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 10:21 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
> >   
> >> Karl Larsen wrote:
> >>     
> >>>>>     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got
> >>>>> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with
> >>>>> this     
> >>>>>           
> >> You mean you could find....
> >>
> >> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/index.html
> >>
> >>     
> > ----
> > He was following Knute Johnsons' installation notes...
> >
> > http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> >
> > which leaves that out
> >
> >   
> Hummm....  Step 1 of that link simply says....
>
> Download the Sun Java Linux RPM from java.sun.com and install it.
>
> Just seems sensible that if you don't know what "install it" means and
> can't figure it out for yourself that you'd look for help from the place
> you downloaded.  But, that's just me....  :-) 
I figure most Java users on F8 have installed it on another version 
or OS before.  The web page was to point out the tricky bits like the 
compat-libstdc++-33 and the now fixed XINERAMA bug.

-- 
Knute Johnson
Molon Labe...

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Les Mikesell wrote:

>  
>  
>  I don't see this as conceptually much different than getting something
>  claiming to be java that isn't with fedora but the real thing with paid
>  RHEL/support.
>   

Which really says it all Les. When you pay for RHEL and get all of these
expected goodies and support and you sell your services using that paid
for support you feel goo.

When you d/l free Fedora and don't get all of these goodies and you sell
your services...

You get what you pay for always.

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2/U4ACgkQAO0wNI1X4QFHaACfQmGclr7jgfm6pJN+nSsj5SDh
> doUAoOj8B4jQV/7+d3Ntx+VY5otXXJNr
> =LH32
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Alan Cox]

>  > Actually for Red Hat it is because Java was non-free. There are
> various
>  > third party products bundled alongside RHEL which businesses demand which
>  > are non-free.
>  
>  And what could possibly make them think that fedora users don't need the 
>  same? 
Fedora is a distribution of free software. Now that Java is becoming free
Fedora will be able to include it. If you want a non-free Java for Fedora
then Sun will supply you with one.

>  >> the baroque locations that java is expected to live on
> RH/fedora to the 
>  >> place that the official distribution puts it if it makes you happy.
>  > 
>  > The Sun package is produced by Sun, they choosoe to put it in /usr/java.
>  
>  Sun probably knows as much as anyone else about where java should live, 
>  but if you want to second guess that and build a morass of symlinks 
>  pointing to symlinks, why not include a set that point to this location? 
You'd have to ask Sun why they did it the way they did.

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

>  then again, I did install the jpackage too and was able to integrate
> it
>  without any fuss but again, this was on EL not Fedora.
>  
>  The implementation path is now well understood and I installed the same
>  JDK/Jpackage for my Fedora 8 desktop since I do Ruby on Rails
>  development on my desktop and run the Ruby-Java-Bridge there. It workee
>  nicely. 
I did it that way on CentOS4, but couldn't find jpackage repositories 
for EL5, or fedora 7 or 8. Are those hidden somewhere?

>  ----
>  yeah, it's a bear to have to 'yum install java-1.6.0-sun-compat'
>  ;-) 
I think you omitted a step or three here.  If that worked out of the box 
on fedora or centos I wouldn't have a complaint. But on an FC6, "yum 
search sun-compat" says No Matches found.

>  ----
>  No, Apple has perfected the notion of re-selling you the same software
>  over and over again, ahem, Leopard, iWork and my current favorite story
>  of Apple saying FU to their customers...BootCamp (we told you all along
>  it was Beta...too bad it expired and now you have to pay to upgrade). 
At least you can pay them and get what you want (and time machine is 
kind of cute).  With Linux they just say you can't ever have it (zfs) or 
you install dozens and dozens of kernels hoping one will finally work 
(firewire, etc.).

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 17:30 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:

>  Sun probably knows as much as anyone else about where java should
> live, 
>  but if you want to second guess that and build a morass of symlinks 
>  pointing to symlinks, why not include a set that point to this location? 
----
sun is indifferent to where a jre/jdk lives

rpm's don't have the luxury of being indifferent but tarballs do.

Plenty of software vendors package sun's java with their software and it
will install anywhere...try installing Dell OMSA package on a Dell
Server

Again, since Sun builds the rpm, they have control over postinstall
scripts that can do whatever including building symlinks, installing
browser plugin in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins or whatever should occur on
an install process.

Craig

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 1:34 PM, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 29, 2007 1:07 PM, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  >> Kam Leo wrote:
>  >>> On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >>>> I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  >>>> includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  >>>> Nvidia drivers that you install?
>  >>>>
>  >>> Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3.
>  >> Do you actually include proprietary kernel modules in their official
>  >> repository? I don't think so.
>  >>
>  >> Rahul
>  >
>  > I was referring to java.
>
>  I doubt they include Sun Java in their main repository either. It is
>  likely they include a repository source.
>
>
>  Rahul 
They offer two repositories: oss and non-oss. The Sun packages are in
the non-oss repository.  Non-oss packages are included with their DVD.
It's a separate disc for the CD version.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> > I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution
> natively
> > includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
> > Nvidia drivers that you install?
> >
>  
>  Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3. 
Do you actually include proprietary kernel modules in their official 
repository? I don't think so.

Rahul

[Les Mikesell]

Cameron Simpson wrote:

> >>> Hi
> >>> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
> >>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
> >>> can any one suggest some thing about that ? 
> >> ----
> >> look in /usr/java
> >>
> >> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
> >> but that should never be necessary.
> > It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live.   
>  
>  It's a third party RPM!
>  Of course it should install out of the way!
>  That way you can use Sun's RPM or another RPM, or both!
>  
> > For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this 
> > breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
>  
>  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.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 17:42 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  
>  >>>> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
>  >>>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
>  >>>> can any one suggest some thing about that ? 
>  >>> ----
>  >>> look in /usr/java
>  >>>
>  >>> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
>  >>> but that should never be necessary.
>  >> It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live.
>
>  >>    For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this 
>  >> breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
>  > ----
>  > patience...
>  > 
>  > They are finally getting around to licensing it under GPL, things are
>  > finally stabilizing.
>  
>  Having everyone do things their own way is your idea of stabilizing? 
>  Who would it have hurt for either RH to make a system where Sun's 
>  packaging would drop in and run or for Sun to package it to match RH's 
>  arbitrary locations?  I never quite got the point of an RPM package that 
>  didn't work. 
----
as you know, the typical methodology is to install finished software
packages in /opt

That is what most major software vendors will, as they do if you install
the rpms from openoffice.org

Obviously, Sun could do the same with java...but they don't

They install in /usr

Obviously Sun has to take responsibility for their install since the
package isn't provided by Fedora.

The integration bits (and there are many) are finessed because while Sun
has historically had a restrictive license, development went on with GCJ
version of java and now everything is wired in, from Tomcat to Docbook
to OpenOffice to Eclipse...it all works without Sun's java.

I applaud the development efforts that try to allow interchangeability
so that Sun's version can be installed and the notion that it should
just work is laudable...and it probably will be realized soon. Fedora is
community driven and unless someone steps up and works it all out, it's
left to Red Hat people who are probably are tasked with higher
priorities than making Sun software work.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

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?

>  ----
> >>> 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.
> > Sun's java works, but if you install it and type java, something else 
> > will run.  That's fedora's fault.
>  ----
>  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 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. 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

>  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.

>  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.

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.

>  ----
> >> 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.
> > Does anything work on Windows?  I meant Solaris as the comparison.
>  ----
>  Ah...well since Sun controls both Solaris and their Java, it would be
>  amusing if they didn't work together. 
I think its amusing that Linux browser plugins haven't worked for so 
long, yet it is so highly touted. 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.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Ed Greshko]

Craig White wrote:
>  On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 10:21 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>    
> > Karl Larsen wrote:
> >     
> >>>>     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got
> >>>> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with
> >>>> this     
> >>>>           
> > You mean you could find....
> >
> > http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/index.html
> >
> >     
>  ----
>  He was following Knute Johnsons' installation notes...
>
>  http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
>
>  which leaves that out
>
>     
Hummm....  Step 1 of that link simply says....

Download the Sun Java Linux RPM from java.sun.com and install it.

Just seems sensible that if you don't know what "install it" means and
can't figure it out for yourself that you'd look for help from the place
you downloaded.  But, that's just me....  :-)


-- 
Of course you have a purpose -- to find a purpose.

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 28 December 2007, Craig White wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 21:37 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Friday 28 December 2007, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > >Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > >>>>> Hi
> > >>>>> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and
> it
> > >>>>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in
> /usr/bin/ ,
> > >>>>> can any one suggest some thing about that ?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> ----
> > >>>> look in /usr/java
> > >>>>
> > >>>> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in
> /usr/bin
> > >>>> but that should never be necessary.
> > >>>
> > >>> It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java
> should
> > >>> live.
> > >>
> > >> It's a third party RPM!
> > >> Of course it should install out of the way!
> > >> That way you can use Sun's RPM or another RPM, or both!
> > >>
> > >>> For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this
> > >>> breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
> > >>
> > >> 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.
> >
> > +5 at least, Les.
>
> ----
> I can't see any reason why you should have more than 1 vote 
Which you usually discount anyway, based on my Senior Citizen discount status 
or whatever..  So I vote early and often to compensate. :)

> 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...
>
> from my installation of jdk-1.6.0.0.3 under LICENSE...
>
> 3. RESTRICTIONS. Software is confidential and copyrighted.
> Title to Software and all associated intellectual property
> rights is retained by Sun and/or its licensors. Unless
> enforcement is prohibited by applicable law, you may not
> modify, decompile, or reverse engineer Software. You
> acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed or
> intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
> maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> disclaims any express or implied warranty of fitness for
> such uses. No right, title or interest in or to any
> trademark, service mark, logo or trade name of Sun or its
> licensors is granted under this Agreement. Additional
> restrictions for developers and/or publishers licenses are
> set forth in the Supplemental License Terms.
>
> Thus with those restrictions, there is no way that Fedora or Red Hat
> would ever distribute it. 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.
>
> Thus with your logic, people would logically go to another distro that
> either embraces restrictive licensed software or pisses on restrictive
> licensing.
>
> 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.
>
> Craig 
You should know by now that I'm pro open src, and have been since forever it 
seems.  But, if the people who write this stuff can use it in good 
conscience, then it doesn't bither me a bot to go download java from the real 
source.  It used to be blackdowns version that was the defacto std but it 
appears Sun has elbowed them out of the picture, mainly I believe by way of 
the free OpenOffice.org offering, the camels nose in the tent if you will.  

In this case, its a whatever works reliably, we'll use it.  Without feeling 
like I should go and have my mouth warshed out with some of Grandma's good 
old Lye soap.

If IcedTea or whatever they want to call it, could do what was requested, then 
more power to the coders that adapted it.  But it more often than not 
doesn't, and rather than filing bz's by the hundreds, we just go get what 
works, its far easier than filing a bz in terms of effort required.  Given 
the time & effort to go get the real thing, that should send the message that 
bz is still, although its gotten easier, a PITA to use.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
What is research but a blind date with knowledge?
		-- Will Harvey

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 21:37 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  On Friday 28 December 2007, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  >Cameron Simpson wrote:
>  >>>>> Hi
>  >>>>> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
>  >>>>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/
> ,
>  >>>>> can any one suggest some thing about that ?
>  >>>>
>  >>>> ----
>  >>>> look in /usr/java
>  >>>>
>  >>>> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
>  >>>> but that should never be necessary.
>  >>>
>  >>> It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should
> live.
>  >>
>  >> It's a third party RPM!
>  >> Of course it should install out of the way!
>  >> That way you can use Sun's RPM or another RPM, or both!
>  >>
>  >>> For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this
>  >>> breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
>  >>
>  >> 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.
>  
>  +5 at least, Les. 
----
I can't see any reason why you should have more than 1 vote

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...

from my installation of jdk-1.6.0.0.3 under LICENSE...

3. RESTRICTIONS. Software is confidential and copyrighted.
Title to Software and all associated intellectual property
rights is retained by Sun and/or its licensors. Unless
enforcement is prohibited by applicable law, you may not
modify, decompile, or reverse engineer Software. You
acknowledge that Licensed Software is not designed or
intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc.
disclaims any express or implied warranty of fitness for
such uses. No right, title or interest in or to any
trademark, service mark, logo or trade name of Sun or its
licensors is granted under this Agreement. Additional
restrictions for developers and/or publishers licenses are
set forth in the Supplemental License Terms.

Thus with those restrictions, there is no way that Fedora or Red Hat
would ever distribute it. 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.

Thus with your logic, people would logically go to another distro that
either embraces restrictive licensed software or pisses on restrictive
licensing.

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.

Craig

[Karl Larsen]

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > On 01Jan2008 09:10, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com&gt; wrote:
> >  
> >>> If you are doing a default x86 Sun JDK install, you will find the
> >>> distributables in /usr/java/jdk.../bin directory. If you are using 
> >>> Java
> >>> 6 then you should also see /usr/java/default and /usr/java/latest
> >>> symlinks pointing to the Java6 directory.
> >>>
> >>> You could add /usr/java/default/bin to your path (either by modifying
> >>> /etc/profile file, or in any other file that you use to setup your
> >>> environment)
> >>>
> >>> Now, you should be able to run whatever command that you wanted to 
> >>> run:
> >>>     java -jar XYZ.jar
> >>>
> >>> Rogue
> >>>         
> >> Hi Rogue, I would never guessed the above. Turns out you need to be 
> >> using a root login.
> >>     
> >
> > No, you should _not_ have to be root. In fact, you should try quite hard
> > to avoid being root when not doing system administration.
> >
> > | But I have the jEdit installed but now reading the man page to  
> >> see how to do it :-)
> >>     
> >
> > Always a good start.
> >
> >  
> >> Thank you so much. I was sure that having no /usr/bin/jar meant I 
> >> did something wrong. But the new stuff takes new ways. Thanks a lot!
> >>     
> >
> > The other thing you should bear in mind is that "jar" is a tool like 
> > "ar",
> > "tar" or "zip" - it constructs, inspects or unpacks
> ".jar" files.
> >
> > To _run_ a java program you want the "java" command.
> >
> > Usually a Java app is distributed as a jar file, an archive 
> > containing the
> > program, and the command "java -jar foo.jar" is used to run it.
> >
> > You still need "java" in your $PATH, or to invoke "java"
> explicitly (eg
> > "/usr/java/bin/java") if it is not in your $PATH. Usually it is 
> > desirable to
> > adjust your $PATH you include this stuff, saving painful long paths 
> > later.
> >
> > Both "java" and "jar" have manual pages, quite good ones. If java
> in
> > installed out of the "vendor" area (here "vendor" means
> redhat/fedora
> > and "/usr/bin" is part of their area - that they expect a free hand
> > in), you will need to adjust your $MANPATH to include the "..../man"
> > directory of wherever the java package is installed, much as you have to
> > adjust $PATH to include the "..../bin" directory to run "java"
> without
> > using the full path of the command.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >   
>     OK I am finding this at /usr/java/:
>
>  [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java
>  default  jre1.6.0_03  latest
>
>  Now default and /usr/java/jrel.6.0_03/ are identical and have this:
>
>  [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/
>  bin        javaws  LICENSE  plugin  THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.txt
>  COPYRIGHT  lib     man      README  Welcome.html
>  [root@k5di ~]#
>
>     My experiance to date is that using $ java -jar filename.jar works 
>  but other problems crop up. Also I have no man java. So it is not in 
>  the searchpath for man packages. How do I fix that?
>
>  Karl
>
>  
    Well I tried to get an earlier version of jedit to run and sure 
enough a NEW JAVA problem. From the error notice that says this:

[karl@k5di ~]$ jedit
GC Warning: Out of Memory!  Returning NIL!
Exception in thread "main" GC Warning: Out of Memory!  Returning NIL!
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: org.gjt.sp.jedit.jEdit
*** Got java.lang.OutOfMemoryError while trying to print stack trace.
[karl@k5di ~]$

I can't tell if it is a problem with jedit or my version 6 java. I don't 
know what GC is and org.gjt.sp.jedit.jedit is greek to me.

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Lamar Owen wrote:
>  > To help develop and test it perhaps? Fedora is a community, not a
>  > product. 
>  I thought rawhide was the place for testing. 
Rawhide is the place for development, not testing.  That's why it's 
called 'development' now.  

>  > Do I despise it when I have to hand-patch the
>  > VMware source shim to get it to compile, on a regular basis?  Sure I do;
>  > but it's as much VMware's fault as it is Fedora's. 
>  No it isn't.  That would be the same for any non-included code. 
> You
>  can't seriously think that every possible, useful piece of code should
>  be included in the distribution and all rebuilt whenever any of it is,
>  can you? 
The Gentoo people believe that, Les.  

No, it would be VMware's fault for not being fully integrated into the 
upstream kernel, where modules belong, not as a separate package.  That is, 
after all, one of the Fedora Packaging Guidelines, that there be no package 
providing a kernel module (from an Official Fedora repository, of course; 
third party repos still do this).  Fact is, having all kernel modules in the 
upstream kernel where rebuilds are automatic is far better for the user; they 
don't have to rebuild anything, then.  If VMware's kernel module(s) were to 
be in the upstream kernel, the problem goes away.  VMware's own license 
conflicting with the upstream license prevents this; this is both the Linux 
kernel developers' fault and VMware's fault, as either could change licenses 
(well, VMware can change its license quicker than the kernel can....).  And 
if you don't like the kernel policy and license, well, I hear the OpenBSD 
kernel devs are very receptive to gadflies.

>  > And, for that matter, it's my own fault for choosing a
>  > proprietary virtualization solution on top of an unsupported (by VMware)
>  > distribution; and I accept that responsibility. 
>  But you've got that source that you recompile every time the
> kernel
>  breaks your binary. 
Yep, and if I had just chosen a VT supporting chip and used Xen instead, I 
wouldn't have that problem.  At the time I chose VMware (and it was a 
choice!) Xen didn't exist.  Nor did the VT stuff, for that matter.  But the 
fact remains that I as the user of this computer have chosen the software 
grouping I run and am responsible to making sure it works for me.  Caveat 
Emptor.  Now, if I had purchased RHEL and VMware to run on it, and the RHEL 
people had introduced such a kernel issue, I would have grounds to be unhappy 
and get in the face of some poor Red Hat tech support guy.  But; for a free 
distribution?  Built primarily by volunteers?  Get real.  Or get another 
distribution that does it your way.  Hmm, make your own, even.

>  > Better, though, is
>  > that the manufacturer of my FireGL V3100 is releasing the source so that
>  > it can be integrated upstream, helping everyone. 
>  Maybe - do you expect the people who don't care about the trouble
> they
>  are causing you now to do any better once they are in complete control? 
Uh, Les, you're sounding paranoid.  Who are 'they' and over what do
'they' 
have complete control?  The Linux kernel developer community already has 
complete control of the system, and I am trusting them and the Fedora 
packagers to not put in a backdoor; the fact that I choose to run Fedora at 
all proves that I have a certain amount of trust for them, no?

If by 'they' you mean the 'Linux kernel developers' I don't blame them
for 
VMware's binary.  But if I were worried about that I would be running a 
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, or OpenSolaris system and not a Linux kernel based Fedora 
system.  Obviously I'm not worried.

And, many years ago, I had a dialog with Alan Cox where he was very helpful in 
assisting me getting a weird soundcard working properly (he was the 
maintainer for the OSSFree stack in the 2.0 Linux kernel at the time; I said 
it was a long time ago!); he was then and still is a gentlemen, as most of 
the kernel developers (and Fedora packagers!) are if treated with the respect 
that they have earned, and not with a 'I want this so you must give it to me 
this way bwahaha!' attitude.

>  > But to bring it back to Java: Fedora is providing the most
> compatible
>  > Java that is available under a Fedora-compatible license. 
>  Is this horseshoes?  Do you get extra points if your code almost
> works? 
Not IcedTea's fault; the incompatibility with my code exists with any JDK 
other than the 1.5 Sun Java.  That includes the 1.6 Java from Sun; not a 
Fedora problem, but a Sun problem.  My code needs to be less fragile and 
version specific, too, but that's a different topic. 

In the ideal case, I would run a test case on my code, and then get back to 
the IcedTea devs with a thorough bug report.  It hasn't been important enough 
yet to go to that trouble, nor have I been able to justify it in a business 
sense.  But, since I can have the Sun Java and IcedTea installed at the same 
time, and switch between them easily with alternatives (and I don't find 
alternatives to be too bizarre, given what it is really doing), I can both 
have a production Sun Java to run, as well as being able to test the IcedTea 
updates as they come out; and when it can run my code, I'll switch to it; or 
when the full OpenJDK can be on Fedora, whichever comes first.

After all, from the IcedTea FAQ: " What are the future plans for IcedTea?

IcedTea is a basis on which to experiment, trying to build a completely FOSS 
(free & open source software) version of the OpenJDK. Ideally, we would like 
to work upsteam directly on the OpenJDK, but there are some legal and 
technical issues that must first be resolved.

IcedTea is not a fork, and is not meant to be a permanent project - just a 
stopgap measure to create a fully FOSS OpenJDK. "

You do realize that OpenJDK IS the Sun Java of the future, right, Les?  It 
needs bug reports, regressions listed, etc, so that it can be the best it can 
be, backwards compatibility and all.

If you don't want to run experimental software, then get Sun's current Java.  
I for one want to see bleeding edge (which by definition MEANS experimental) 
software in Fedora; Fedora itself is bleeding edge.  That means you're going 
to get cut sooner or later trying to use it.  Don't like that?  Buy RHEL and 
stick with something supported.

>  > This is much like the IPv4 to IPv6 'migration' situation
> that's been
>  > discussed all over NANOG (and other networking groups) for years;
>
>  [...]
>
>  > The 'purist' solution would have been IPv6 instead of NAT; 
>  The 'purist' approach would have been to use the
> overspec'd and
>  underimplemented OSI protocols in the first place instead of IP and not
>  run out of addresses.  But there wasn't a *bsd licensed version to drive
>  adoption (or a free gov't sponsored directory service)... 
As the GOSIP specs and standards specified the use of the OSI stack (CLNS, 
CLNP, IS-IS, and friends), and since BSD-licensed support of OSI as of 4.3BSD 
Reno (released in 1990) existed, this too is a strawman.  TCP/IP won because 
it wasn't designed then implemented; TCP/IP won because it learned from its 
errors (slow start, anyone?) and went on.  Incidentally, many TCP/IP networks 
use the OSI IS-IS interior gateway routing protocol; OSI at some levels is 
far from dead.  CLNS/CLNP and friends aren't going to the desktop anytime 
soon, but they are still in use.

But I'm talking about the purist approach to solving the IPv4 numbering 
problem, which first manifested itself as a shortage of Class B networks.

>  I believe there was exactly one non-backwards compatible change when
>  there were about a dozen hosts connected.  Since then, backwards
>  compatibility and not breaking the existing, installed base has been the
>  primary concern - and the reason that base has continued to increase. 
Not entirely true.  The transition to CIDR was not at all painless, and BGPv4 
(the current primary Internet exterior gateway routing protocol) isn't 
terribly backwards compatible with its predecessors.  The change from the old 
ARPA protocol to TCP/IP was on January 1, 1983, although the use of TCP/IP 
had been increasing before that.  Reread RFC801 for context.  Also, in 
August, 1983, shortly after the great TCP cutover, there were approximately 
562 hosts on the Internet, not just a dozen.  It was a real flag day.  With 
the number of hosts connected today, such a flag day would be impossible.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Les Mikesell]

Lamar Owen wrote:
>  
> > If you can't measure it, you can't improve it.  And if you haven't
> > measured it, why, if you release it, should someone install it?
>  
>  To help develop and test it perhaps? Fedora is a community, not a product. 
I thought rawhide was the place for testing.

>  Yes, a user typically doesn't care about that.  But a user SHOULD
> care about 
>  it, and learn that truly Free software is a worthwhile goal, regardless of 
>  the inconvenience.  
That is a religion, not an observation.  Not having a monopoly is what 
I'd consider a better goal, and letting competition deliver what is 
worthwhile.

>  While I am one who actually understands your issue, and while I agree
> with 
>  much of it, at the same time, when I chose to run Fedora 8 on this laptop I 
>  knew (or should have known) what I was getting into, and I also knew that 
>  things would be volatile.  This is not an Enterprise distribution, after all.  
>  Do I despise it when I have to hand-patch the VMware source shim to get it to 
>  compile, on a regular basis?  Sure I do; but it's as much VMware's fault as 
>  it is Fedora's. 
No it isn't.  That would be the same for any non-included code.  You 
can't seriously think that every possible, useful piece of code should 
be included in the distribution and all rebuilt whenever any of it is, 
can you?

>  And, for that matter, it's my own fault for choosing a 
>  proprietary virtualization solution on top of an unsupported (by VMware) 
>  distribution; and I accept that responsibility.   
But you've got that source that you recompile every time the kernel 
breaks your binary.

>  Do I hate it when a new kernel version comes along that breaks the
> drivers for 
>  my video card?  Sure: but I chose to buy that card, I chose to run Fedora, 
>  and I chose to run the BLOB drivers; so it's my fault as much as it is the 
>  others' fault.  Will I submit bug reports?  Perhaps; perhaps I'll just wait, 
>  and perhaps I won't blindly update my kernel (very very few kernel bugs 
>  result in remote system compromise, and I run enough layers of security, and 
>  am willing enough to reinstall my system from scratch if need be, to where 
>  it's not an issue). Better, though, is that the manufacturer of my FireGL 
>  V3100 is releasing the source so that it can be integrated upstream, helping 
>  everyone. 
Maybe - do you expect the people who don't care about the trouble they 
are causing you now to do any better once they are in complete control?

>  But to bring it back to Java: Fedora is providing the most compatible
> Java 
>  that is available under a Fedora-compatible license.  
Is this horseshoes?  Do you get extra points if your code almost works?

>  
>  This is much like the IPv4 to IPv6 'migration' situation that's been
> discussed 
>  all over NANOG (and other networking groups) for years; 
[...]
>  
>  The 'purist' solution would have been IPv6 instead of NAT;  
The 'purist' approach would have been to use the overspec'd and 
underimplemented OSI protocols in the first place instead of IP and not 
run out of addresses.  But there wasn't a *bsd licensed version to drive 
adoption (or a free gov't sponsored directory service)...

>  use this as a 
>  comparison to the 'purely Free Fedora stance' versus the 'I just want it to 
>  work' stance: many network ops will say (probably correctly!) that NAT set 
>  back the Internet ten years or more on getting IPv6 deployed.  Of course, the 
>  overreaching expansion and bloat that is IPv6 didn't help any!  Necessity is 
>  the mother of invention; having no necessity produces feeping creaturitis.
>  
>  Our 'popular network protocol' wasn't designed; it was developed in an 
>  iterative and not well managed process  (RFC's?  Managed?  ROTFL!) ; yet it 
>  works. 
I believe there was exactly one non-backwards compatible change when 
there were about a dozen hosts connected.  Since then, backwards 
compatibility and not breaking the existing, installed base has been the 
primary concern - and the reason that base has continued to increase.

-- 
    Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Ed Greshko]

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > On 02Jan2008 12:53, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com&gt; wrote:
> >  
> >> Cameron Simpson wrote:
> >>    
> >>> The other thing you should bear in mind is that "jar" is a tool
> >>> like "ar",
> >>> "tar" or "zip" - it constructs, inspects or unpacks
> ".jar" files.
> >>>
> >>> To _run_ a java program you want the "java" command.
> >>>
> >>> Usually a Java app is distributed as a jar file, an archive
> >>> containing the
> >>> program, and the command "java -jar foo.jar" is used to run it.
> >>>
> >>> You still need "java" in your $PATH, or to invoke "java"
> explicitly
> >>> (eg
> >>> "/usr/java/bin/java") if it is not in your $PATH. Usually it is
> >>> desirable to
> >>> adjust your $PATH you include this stuff, saving painful long paths
> >>> later.
> >>>
> >>> Both "java" and "jar" have manual pages, quite good ones.
> If java in
> >>> installed out of the "vendor" area (here "vendor" means
> redhat/fedora
> >>> and "/usr/bin" is part of their area - that they expect a free
> hand
> >>> in), you will need to adjust your $MANPATH to include the
> "..../man"
> >>> directory of wherever the java package is installed, much as you
> >>> have to
> >>> adjust $PATH to include the "..../bin" directory to run
> "java" without
> >>> using the full path of the command.
> >>>         
> >>    OK I am finding this at /usr/java/:
> >>
> >> [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java
> >> default  jre1.6.0_03  latest
> >>
> >> Now default
> >>     
> >       ^^^^^^^
> > I am not sure what you mean at this ^^^ point.
> > Unless "default" is a symbolic link that points at
> "jre1.6.0_03".
> > The "ls -l /usr/java/" command will show this.
> >
> >  
> >> and /usr/java/jrel.6.0_03/ are identical and have this:
> >>
> >> [root@k5di ~]# ls /usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/
> >> bin        javaws  LICENSE  plugin  THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.txt
> >> COPYRIGHT  lib     man      README  Welcome.html
> >> [root@k5di ~]#
> >>
> >>    My experiance to date is that using $ java -jar filename.jar
> >> works but other problems crop up. Also I have no man java. So it is
> >> not in the searchpath for man packages. How do I fix that?
> >>     
> >
> > As mentioned, you want to update your $PATH and $MANPATH.
> > Looking at your output above I would suggest running these shell
> > commands:
> >
> >   PATH=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/bin:$PATH
> >   MANPATH=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03/man:$MANPATH
> >   export PATH MANPATH
> >
> > The other thing that java tends to like is the $JAVA_HOME variable.
> > You might usefull do this instead:
> >
> >   JAVA_HOME=/usr/java/jre1.6.0_03
> >   PATH=$JAVA_HOME/bin:$PATH
> >   MANPATH=$JAVA_HOME/man:$MANPATH
> >   export JAVA_HOME PATH MANPATH
> >
> > The see if "man java" produces a manual page. (Be warning, it's a very
> > long manual page!) Also see if "java -jar filename.jar" now behaves
> > better.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >   
>     I did your calls but I made then to /usr/java/default/man for
>  example because default will become the latest java unpacked on your
>  computer. All I did yeaterday makes the downloaded java work. \ 
Could you try that
again....in English.

-- 
[...] Vimes's grin was as funny as the one that moves very fast towards
drowning men. And has a fin on top. (Jingo)

[Alan Cox]

>  I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the
> reference 
>  version of java.  
It follows the Linux Standards Base and thus the FHS standard for where
files go.

[Gene Heskett]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Peter Boy wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 30.12.2007, 12:49 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
> > It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of this
> > choice instead of blindly defending it.
>
> As with most decisions in real life: most benefits in one dimension have
> drawbacks in others. If I want the freedom of free software, I may have
> to struggle with issues in using non-free software. It is simply a
> matter of choice (and conscious decision).
>
> > > Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora
> choosed
> > > not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
> >
> > They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it
> > difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one
> > problem.
>
> Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. You may install the Sun
> provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
> doesn't work out of the box (doesn't work in any Linux distribution, the
> bug report is some years old and Sun choosed not to fix it), install one
> of the suggested workarounds (e.g. edit a shell script
> in /etc/profile.d) and you are ready to go. As with any distributions
> Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution.
> Third party vendors have to care ybout their software.
>
> And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat takes care
> about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. Or the
> former SuSE distribution where SuSE made a different regarding the
> licence issue.
>
> > A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix
> > this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the
> > distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal
> > symlinks.
>
> You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
> for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
> Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
> specific one.
>
> > The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
> >   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an
> > incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
> > and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java
> > program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
> > shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm
> > surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>
> The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
> scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
> the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
> intermediate state during development. All this is quite different.
>
> > > So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
> > > you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
> > > parallel. That's the Fedora way.
> >
> > It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
>
> You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
> have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways. 
Here, with a fresh install of x86_64 on my lappy, an about:plugins gives a 
long list of IcedTea stuff.

So I sent FF off to http://www.cnn.com.  Clicking on the first video in the 
list, it said I needed flash, so I clicked on the download button.  Then I 
became root and installed it, and restarted FF.  It was there in the about 
list, so I went back to cnn.com and they all played just fine.

Now, this thread was saying what about IcedTea?

> Peter 
-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Bare feet magnetize sharp metal objects so they point upward from the
floor -- especially in the dark.

[Karl Larsen]

Rogue wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>    
> > Ed Greshko wrote:
> >     
> >> Karl Larsen wrote:
> >>  
> >>       
> >>> Les Mikesell wrote:
> >>>    
> >>>         
> >>>> Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>      
> >>>>           
> >>>>>>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the        
>     
> >>>>>>>                 
> >>>    Returning to Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site.
> >>> It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign
> >>> something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.
> >>>
> >>>    I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the
> >>> Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do
> >>> this:
> >>>
> >>> $ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >>>
> >>> but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked
> >>> but on F8 it doesn't.
> >>>
> >>> What have I done wrong?
> >>>
> >>>     
> >>>         
> >> I don't know what you did wrong.  But on my F8 system I did install
> >> Sun's jdk (jdk-6u3-linux-i586.rpm)
> >> and there is /usr/bin/jar.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>   
> >>       
> >    I looked and no /usr/bin/jar but there is a /usr/bin/java which lead
> > to gij which seems to work but not. It did this:
> >
> > [karl@k5di Desktop]$ gij jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
> > jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >   at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
> > Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> > not found in gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader{urls=[file:./],
> > parent=gnu.gcj.runtime.ExtensionClassLoader{urls=[], parent=null}}
> >   at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
> >   at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
> > [karl@k5di Desktop]$
> >
> > It appears that the jedit file may be bad.
> >
> > Geeze
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >     
>
>  Karl,
>
>  If you are doing a default x86 Sun JDK install, you will find the
>  distributables in /usr/java/jdk.../bin directory. If you are using Java
>  6 then you should also see /usr/java/default and /usr/java/latest
>  symlinks pointing to the Java6 directory.
>
>  You could add /usr/java/default/bin to your path (either by modifying
>  /etc/profile file, or in any other file that you use to setup your
>  environment)
>
>  Now, you should be able to run whatever command that you wanted to run:
>  	java -jar XYZ.jar
>
>  HTH,
>  Rogue
>     
Hi Rogue, I would never guessed the above. Turns out you need to be 
using a root login. But I have the jEdit installed but now reading the 
man page to see how to do it :-)

Thank you so much. I was sure that having no /usr/bin/jar meant I did 
something wrong. But the new stuff takes new ways. Thanks a lot!

Karl


> >  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >  Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
> >
> >  iD8DBQFHelRjceS9IQvx51YRAhTSAJ4qKIW6nWbvLTTodCxmoE4lTReC0gCfXD2p
> >  Unhj2PsZEy4WaNkLSSfsAYE=
> >  =FbJ7
> >  -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
>     

-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:
> >> Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any
> contributions
> >> under a licence that makes them free.
> > You mean restricted, don't you?
>  
>  If you are at the point where you conclude that people type the reverse
>  of the word they mean you have serious problems. 
I'm not the one who reversed the meaning of free to mean restricted. And 
the GPL is simply restrictions.

> > something better?  Any why assume that it would necessarily be
> charged 
> > for?  There are plenty of examples of non-GPL'd code that is freely 
> > available and no evidence that it can't stay that way.
>  
>  There are also very large numbers of examples where key parts did so,
>  particularly with modular code such as an OS. 
And the problem?   The unrestricted form is still available and everyone 
has a choice of which to use.  Freedom should be about increasing your 
choices not restricting them.  And any code that exists on a network can 
affect all of us, so we are better off with common, well-tested 
components instead of forcing new breakage to be invented.

> > It is not illegal, but it takes code that permits future
> innovation and 
> > turns it into something that restricts it, harming everyone in the 
> > process.  
>  
>  And the GPL exists to stop someone taking code and turning it into
>  something that restricts further, that is the heart of what it does,
>  which makes your delusions even stranger. 
It exists to keep potentially better variations from competing against 
the original, which makes sense in the cases where the author is selling 
  his own better version or support for the specific problems it embeds.

It's no delusion that better things could exist if the GPL did not 
prohibit them, perhaps even things that would compete successfully with 
The Monopoly.

> > What?  Competition is a good thing, and necessary for freedom and
>
> > innovation.  Preventing it is an act of restriction, not freedom.
>  
>  A competing book is not the another authors book reprinted and the money
>  pocketed. An innovative painting is not a copy of an existing work. 
Those aren't exactly analogous. It would be more like a book/painting 
available freely to everyone prohibiting it's inclusion in a compilation 
of works - or keeping themselves from being improved in other ways.  The 
FSF even claims that it is illegal to distribute components separately 
that may be combined with GPL'd parts unless you apply the same 
restrictions.  That's like saying I can't give someone a cover for their 
copyrighted book or a frame for their painting.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 30 December 2007, Craig White wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 15:16 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 December 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > >Les Mikesell wrote:
> > >> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java
> > >> compatable but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to
> > >> promote an incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with
> > >> the java name and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The
> > >> fedora-shipped not-java program that executes with the java name does
> > >> just as much damage and shouldn't be named java until it passes the
> > >> compatibility tests.  I'm surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed
> this
> > >> abuse of a trademarked name.
> > >
> > >That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't
> > >consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used
> > >the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort.
> > >IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in
> > >Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to
> > >remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes
> > >completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.
> > >
> > >Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
> > >until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
> > >paved the way to better compatibility.
> > >
> > >http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-
> > >jav a/
> > >
> > >Rahul
> >
> > Excellent news, Rahul.  Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe?
>
> ----
> you should have followed the links in the article which would have
> brought you to...
>
> http://labs.jboss.com/community/interviews/sacha_sun.html
>
> which actually answers that and more
>
> Craig 
Maybe.  The pointlessness of this thread seems lost on about half the posters 
though.  Generally speaking, I'm in the same camp as Les, I just want it to 
work.  If I have to go put a virtual quarter in the meter, so be it.  All the 
political posturing in the world is of little or no use to the majority of us 
if it results in something being non-functional when it works flawlessly for 
the other 97% of the people on this planet running a windwoes install, legal 
or not.

The only way to fix it is to follow William Shakespears advice, "First we kill 
all the lawyers", so the rest of us can sit down at the table and make our 
case.  We both know that is not going to happen tomorrow.

Now, will somebody PLEASE put either a wooden stake or a silver bullet through 
this threads heart and put it out of its misery, there are other things 
besides java to be discussed.  Like what sort of political pressure can we 
bring to bear on broadcom to get some decent register level specs for their 
friggin radios?  That, for those of us with laptops that came with such an 
abomination of an unsupported radio, is at least as important as this bit of 
slanguage called java.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
A lifetime isn't nearly long enough to figure out what it's all about.

[Les Mikesell]

Peter Boy wrote:
>  It's rather a long thread now, but I think we must have the
> patience to
>  explain and promote key principles again and again. 
It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of this 
choice instead of blindly defending it.

>  Am Samstag, den 29.12.2007, 18:17 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
> > I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the reference 
> > version of java.  And why it ships something that executes with the name 
> > java that probably doesn't pass the compatibility tests.
>  
>  Simply the wrong questions. 
It is the one that matters.

>  Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but
> Fedora choosed
>  not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java) 
They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it 
difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one 
problem.  A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix 
this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the 
distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal 
symlinks.

>  And Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with ..."
> but choosed to
>  support the development of a truly free alternative which is (rsp. was)
>  intended to achieve compatibility, but needed time for development and
>  testing.  
The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable 
  but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an 
incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name 
and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java 
program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and 
shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm 
surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.

>  Those who need a reference-compatible version have to install a Java
>  distribution outside the Fedora repositories. And there are provisions
>  that you can do that without conflicts with the Fedora (test) version. 
Ooohh fedora has 'provisions' to permit it to run outside programs. 
Great...

>  So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version
> and
>  you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
>  parallel. That's the Fedora way. 
It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.

>  And regarding the file locations: it is not part of the reference.
> And
>  when you engage a search engine of your choice you will find a lot of
>  discussios in the past about problems with the file layout Sun choosed
>  to use. 
What I find in a search is a confusing and conflicting mess of 
instructions about how to fix fedora in various ways.  As for file 
layouts, they are pretty much arbitrary and I don't see anything to 
defend the choice of parking executable binaries under /usr/lib either.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:36 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  
>  > ----
>  > openNMS isn't packaged or distributed with Fedora is it?
>  
>  No, I'm not interested in being restricted to the subset of programs 
>  that are included in a distribution.  Are you? 
----
Twasn't a big deal to install Sun's java as for usage with things like
Zenoss and I ended up doing it again for Tomcat/Alfresco

then again, I did install the jpackage too and was able to integrate it
without any fuss but again, this was on EL not Fedora.

The implementation path is now well understood and I installed the same
JDK/Jpackage for my Fedora 8 desktop since I do Ruby on Rails
development on my desktop and run the Ruby-Java-Bridge there. It workee
nicely.
----
>  
>  > ----
>  >>> 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's more than luck.  It's a miracle if that happened after just 
>  installing Sun's RPM. 
----
yeah, it's a bear to have to 'yum install java-1.6.0-sun-compat'
;-)
----
>  > 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.
>  
>  It's not completely impossible to make it work but not trivial and I 
>  think you have to admit that you aren't an average user. 
----
dunno, I see a lot of people including you that know a hell of a lot
more than I do so do actually think of myself as an average user.
----
>  >> 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
>  
>  64 bit java and flash (both are supposed to work in Solaris), and 
>  probably others. 
----
Flash has worked fine for me on F7-x86_64 and F8-x86_64  I'm convinced
that it's the nspluginwrapper x86_64/i386 software making it
happen...it's effective. It also allows the acroread plugin to work too
but definitely not Sun's Java  ;-(  I don't see reports of Java working
embedded in a 64 bit version of Firefox on any distribution so I don't
think that it's a Fedora issue.
----
>  So which one is perfect? There's nothing particularly
> mac-specific in 
>  the problems of connecting inbound through NAT routers. At least Apple 
>  doesn't just say 'you can't have it because its license isn't 
>  restrictive enough to be called free'.  And they don't go out of their 
>  way to make their system difficult to use with 3rd party programs - 
>  mostly, anyway. 
----
No, Apple has perfected the notion of re-selling you the same software
over and over again, ahem, Leopard, iWork and my current favorite story
of Apple saying FU to their customers...BootCamp (we told you all along
it was Beta...too bad it expired and now you have to pay to upgrade).

As for Back to My Mac not being able to transverse NAT based routers
(which probably represents 60+% of their user base), it's not as if they
couldn't have anticipated that issue...it's the same issue that all
software installations face. It's the same issue that typical
exploitware faces. It's the face of a company that sells software
upgrades based upon features that actually aren't fully baked, don't
work but they'll get it fixed up sooner or later...who does that remind
you of? Yeah...the folks making the 'Insanely Great Software' in
Redmond.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

David Boles wrote:
>  
>  Microsoft does not provide Java on their disk. Actually they provide the
>  operating system only. It does have some built in features but nothing
>  really great. You get a real deal with the Linux OS/software when you
>  install.  ;-) 
Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll get something that 
is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Karl Larsen]

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

[eng.waleed]

Hi , resolved the problem , the symolink in the /etc/alternatives/java was mentioning to
error place , recreate it and every thing work fine thanks
----------------------------------------
>  Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 21:42:09 -0800
>  From: kam.leo(a)gmail.com
>  To: fedora-list(a)redhat.com
>  Subject: Re: Java problem
>  
>  On Dec 28, 2007 8:33 PM, 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
>  
>  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.
>  
>  -- 
>  fedora-list mailing list
>  fedora-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list 
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

> > 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. 
Cooperation would be enough.  Redistribution would be even better, but I 
suppose the fedora freeloaders aren't going to get that from RedHat.

> > 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? 
Them?  Fedora is the one that ships something that isn't java that 
executes when you type 'java'.

>  ----
> >> 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? 
Is a Totem type situation something where the distribution includes a 
link to a legal download that you click and it comes up running? If so, 
that would be great.

>  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? 
I'm suggesting that calling something java that isn't java is just plain 
wrong. These things should either not work until a conforming java is 
installed (which should never have been a problem) or they should use 
something with a name other than java to do whatever they need if 
something sort-of like java to do whatever they are missing.

>  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. 
I think everyone has been harmed by the difficulty in getting a 
conforming java installed - just like they were when Microsoft shipped 
something called java that wasn't.

>  ----
> >> 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. 
Sun's java works, but if you install it and type java, something else 
will run.  That's fedora's fault.

> >> 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. 
Does anything work on Windows?  I meant Solaris as the comparison.


-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[John Summerfield]

Lamar Owen wrote:

>  
>  While it would be very nice, for many people, for the kernel module ABI and 
>  API to remain a constant, it is plain from the Linux kernel upstream that 
>  this isn't going to happen; and it's not a Fedora thing.  The Fedora issue is 
>  where a kernel version upgrade that changes the source code module API is 
>  introduced inside a release; good grief, can it not wait until the next 
>  Fedora release, where I EXPECT breakage in this interface?  In F7, the 2.6.22 
>  to 2.6.23 caught alot of people (and not just binary module people) off  
You need to upgrade your expectations:-)

>  guard.  Will F8, which shipped a 2.6.23, get a 2.6.24 that similarly
> breaks 
>  some things?  After all, the Linux 2.6.x series is a development kernel  
I'm sure it will.

>  series; there was and there is no stable 2.6.x kernel (now, 2.6.x.y,
> on the 
>  other hand, can be fairly stable, from an API/ABI point of view), in the same 
>  sense as 2.4.x, 2.2.x, or even 2.0.x is and was stable. 
Fedora's first goal is to showcase the latest technologies. If you can't 
risk the instability this entails, use RHEL or one of its clones.

Other major distros have a similar approach to development and carry 
similar risks with their "latest technology showcases."



>  We in the open source world, and specifically in the Fedora world,
> have a 
>  unique and extraordinary opportunity to try out and impact the development of 
>  our OS!  Running bleeding edge stuff that you can actually tinker with is a 
>  privilege, not a bugfest!  Instead of just installing the Sun JDK and taking 
>  the easy way out, should I have time to pursue it, I plan to help the 
>  development of the next generation out, and feel good about doing it.
>  
>  And that, in a nutshell, is why I run Fedora X (where X is the current 
>  version) on my personal laptop, even with the annoyances I can feel great 
>  about what bug reports and help I can provide to this great group. 
If, knowing (as you and I do) the risks inherent in using Fedora we 
choose to do so. OTOH there seem to many here who don't understand that 
this is no RHEL, and will risk their business on it.

-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)

[Les Mikesell]

Lamar Owen wrote:

> > This isn't something you have to guess about.  There is a
> compatibility
> > test.
>  
>  Have you run any tests against icedtea?  Which specific ones failed?  Were 
>  bugs filed in bugzilla about them? 
No, I don't see the point of replacing something that works with 
something not already proven to be better.

> > There are different versions with different tests.  Sun is the
> authority
> > on this unless that have given that up recently.  The fact that this
> > isn't clear shows just how badly the fake versions have damaged the name.
>  
>  We here have had Java compatibility problems with this app since before gcj, 
>  icedtea, or other FOSS solutions were available.  The most notorious, of 
>  course, was Microsoft's java, which didn't work at all.  
So you do understand the damage that shipping incompatible versions 
causes...

>  We learned that we 
>  had to specify a particular JRE, and we provide information about this issue 
>  during our training workshops.  This is just the applet; the servlet is even 
>  more version-sensitive (we are doing telescope control using custom hardware; 
>  JRE/JDK upgrades are very touchy, even inside a major JDK version). 
Even Sun could have done a better job with versioning the code and 
providing backwards compatibility.

> > That's a different - and solvable - issue.  If a replacement
> shell did
> > something different internally, like removing quotes before expanding
> > wildcards you'd get the kind of damage that an incompatible java
> > interpreter can do.
>  
>  Ever try a real Korn shell on different platforms?  
I used it on AT&T sysvr4, but only with Bourne-compatible syntax since I 
didn't expect it to be available everywhere.

>  Specifically, ever tried 
>  it on an Apollo DomainOS 10 or later system?  
No - again I don't see the point of using something incompatible...

>  You'd hate that system; 
>  depending upon the setting of an environment variable, you had different 
>  shells, different sets of programs, and different behaviors (SysV, BSD, or 
>  Aegis).
>  
>  But that's a different story. 
Did any of the settings fail with Bourne-compatible syntax?  I've always 
used perl for the things I didn't expect /bin/sh to handle portably with 
Bourne shell syntax.  Other than command line editing, the ksh 
extensions weren't compelling enough to give up portability.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Karl Larsen]

Ed Greshko wrote:
>  Les Mikesell wrote:
>    
> > Craig White wrote:
> >     
> >>>>   
> >>>>           
> >>>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small
> >>> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, 
    I
screwed up here. Version 1.5 is not very old. But for some reason 
the java 1.5 on F8 doesn't support installing jedit.

    The jre-1.5.0-gcj is what we have built in on F8. It is small in 
byte size compared to the downloaded jre-6u3-linux-i586.rpm.

    The later rpm seems to put up a local file system in the  /usr/java/ 
directory that is used if you call java from the /bin directory there. 
It is just much more capable of supporting java software.

Karl



> >>>  and that
> >>> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the
> >>> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to
> >>> allow the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing
> >>> the work. Look at my new messages on java.
> >>>         
> >> ----
> >> nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.
> >>       
> > On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of
> > java on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be
> > right that it shouldn't be that way...
> >
> >     
>  Ah, yes...now I understand.  1+1=2 except in cases where it does not
>  actually equal 1 but may = something less or more than 1 if it happens
>  to be the 3rd Sunday in a month that has a even numbered Thursday.
>
>
>     

-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Lamar Owen wrote:
>  > ; he was then and still is a gentlemen, as most of
>  > the kernel developers (and Fedora packagers!) are if treated with the
>  > respect that they have earned, and not with a 'I want this so you must
>  > give it to me this way bwahaha!' attitude. 
>  It's not a matter of whether anyone must give me something or
> not, I
>  just won't run Linux where it keeps breaking and I'm not convinced that
>  anyone can do better at drivers than the vendors that build the hardware. 
And, in the specific case of AMD/ATI, once things are completely open source 
you may see the upstream vendor source in the upstream X.org and kernel 
packages, with ATI/AMD people doing the maintenance.  That would be the ideal 
scenario, IMO.  

While it would be very nice, for many people, for the kernel module ABI and 
API to remain a constant, it is plain from the Linux kernel upstream that 
this isn't going to happen; and it's not a Fedora thing.  The Fedora issue is 
where a kernel version upgrade that changes the source code module API is 
introduced inside a release; good grief, can it not wait until the next 
Fedora release, where I EXPECT breakage in this interface?  In F7, the 2.6.22 
to 2.6.23 caught alot of people (and not just binary module people) off 
guard.  Will F8, which shipped a 2.6.23, get a 2.6.24 that similarly breaks 
some things?  After all, the Linux 2.6.x series is a development kernel 
series; there was and there is no stable 2.6.x kernel (now, 2.6.x.y, on the 
other hand, can be fairly stable, from an API/ABI point of view), in the same 
sense as 2.4.x, 2.2.x, or even 2.0.x is and was stable.

>  It's a multitasking machine - you should be able to run both
> [IcedTea and
>   Sun JDK] at once (and you can, if you can find them). 
rpm -ql is your friend.  It is more difficult to do so for the browser applet.

>  > You do realize that OpenJDK IS the Sun Java of the future,
> right, Les? 
>  Yes, but would you try to drive the car of the future while it still
> has
>  some parts missing? 
If I were a car enthusiast that is delving into development autos running 
cutting edge biofuels, for testing on a closed circuit, sure, in a heartbeat.  
Fedora is an enthusiast distribution, IMO, and is much like this hypothetical 
biofuel car I might be playing around with.  

Would I run the kids to town for a doctor's appointment in it?  No.  Would I 
drive the Blue Ridge Parkway in the middle of the night in it?  No.  Would I 
drive myself to work in it?  Sure (disclosure: PARI and I are 
next-door-neighbors...my commute is less than 2 miles, even though my house 
is only a couple of thousand feet from my office).  Would I run Fedora on a 
mission critical server? No.  My personal laptop?  Sure, with backups and 
snapshots of everything critical.  What about a development server?  Sure, as 
it gives me a chance to try out some new stuff.

Ah, but now here's the rub: Would I drive a complete biofuels car that could 
not run on straight gasoline or diesel?  The question here is compatibility; 
the answer is "as long as there are biofuel stations along my routes to 
whereever I want to go."  It would be understood that I would be on my own as 
to finding fuel if I'm driving something that cutting edge; it's also 
understood that just because there are no biofuels stations out in your neck 
of the woods doesn't mean that I shouldn't use this car in my neck of the 
woods, and vice-versa (speaking of 'neck of the woods', I'd love to see the 
redneck installer language resurrected....sure beats geekspeak. Nottingham?  
You listening? :-)).

What if it would run on straight diesel, but I had to add a pint of a special 
homemade 'shine to the mix to make it stable?   The question here is 
legality; the answer is "If I can get a license to make or otherwise obtain 
the 'shine legally, sure.  If 'shine will always be illegal, then it depends 
on the likelihood of getting caught and the penalties if I did get caught... 
but, not for anything that might cause problems for my family or employer!" 
(cue MP3 of 'Taps' now....) (Incidentally, for some legal pints of that 
special MP3 'shine, head over to Fluendo, where the mp3 DECODER is $0, and 
where you can legally obtain many other media codecs.)

We in the open source world, and specifically in the Fedora world, have a 
unique and extraordinary opportunity to try out and impact the development of 
our OS!  Running bleeding edge stuff that you can actually tinker with is a 
privilege, not a bugfest!  Instead of just installing the Sun JDK and taking 
the easy way out, should I have time to pursue it, I plan to help the 
development of the next generation out, and feel good about doing it.

And that, in a nutshell, is why I run Fedora X (where X is the current 
version) on my personal laptop, even with the annoyances I can feel great 
about what bug reports and help I can provide to this great group.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 11:12 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  
>  >>> Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the point that
>  >>> people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
>  >>> Windows.
>  >> Errr... What universe are you in?  That's the problem I'd really like to
>
>  >> see solved - and the reason I keep harping about usability (and GPL) 
>  >> problems.
>  > ----
>  > I'm not having any problems. Are you having problems? All I see is you
>  > trying to score some ethereal point.
>  
>  You don't have to deal with Windows regularly on your networks?  Free 
>  software fanaticism at the expense of usability is hardly an ethereal 
>  point - it is what keeps the monopoly in business. 
----
only 2 Windows machines, 4 relatively new Macintoshes, lots of old (OS9)
Macs but in main office, mostly Linux kickstart installs.

I manage, it's not a problem. Each OS has its own pluses and minuses.

Craig

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 01:01 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  > On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 10:42 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  >   
>  >> Craig White wrote:
>  >>
>  >>     
>  >>>>>>>   
>  >>>>>>>               
>  >>>>>>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a
> small 
>  >>>>>> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and
> that 
>  >>>>>> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of
> the 
>  >>>>>> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to
> allow 
>  >>>>>> the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the
> work. 
>  >>>>>> Look at my new messages on java.
>  >>>>>>             
>  >>>>> ----
>  >>>>> nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing
> about.
>  >>>>>           
>  >>>> On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience'
> of java 
>  >>>> on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be right
>
>  >>>> that it shouldn't be that way...
>  >>>>         
>  >>> ----
>  >>> ROFLMAO!!!
>  >>>
>  >>> Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the point that
>  >>> people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
>  >>> Windows.
>  >>>       
>  >> Errr... What universe are you in?  That's the problem I'd really like to
>
>  >> see solved - and the reason I keep harping about usability (and GPL) 
>  >> problems.
>  >>     
>  > ----
>  > I'm not having any problems. Are you having problems? All I see is you
>  > trying to score some ethereal point.
>  >   
>  I thought ethereal was now called wireshark. 
----
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethereal

Craig

[Ed Greshko]

Craig White wrote:
>  On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 10:42 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>    
> > Craig White wrote:
> >
> >     
> >>>>>>   
> >>>>>>               
> >>>>>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small
>
> >>>>> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
> >>>>> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
> >>>>> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to
> allow 
> >>>>> the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work.
>
> >>>>> Look at my new messages on java.
> >>>>>             
> >>>> ----
> >>>> nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.
> >>>>           
> >>> On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of
> java 
> >>> on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be right 
> >>> that it shouldn't be that way...
> >>>         
> >> ----
> >> ROFLMAO!!!
> >>
> >> Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the point that
> >> people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
> >> Windows.
> >>       
> > Errr... What universe are you in?  That's the problem I'd really like to 
> > see solved - and the reason I keep harping about usability (and GPL) 
> > problems.
> >     
>  ----
>  I'm not having any problems. Are you having problems? All I see is you
>  trying to score some ethereal point.
>     
I thought ethereal was now called wireshark.

-- 
My pants just went to high school in the Carlsbad Caverns!!!

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Lamar Owen wrote:
>  > Have you run any tests against icedtea?  Which specific ones failed? 
>  > Were bugs filed in bugzilla about them?
>
>  No, I don't see the point of replacing something that works with
>  something not already proven to be better. 
What is 'better'?  Sorry, I know that sounds like splitting hairs, but there 
is no way of proving something is 'better' (in the most amorphous sense of 
that already amorphous word) without releasing it.  That's why you have 
alternatives, and that's why the system is an open one.  That's why it is a 
built-in possibility to replace the provided java infrastructure with the Sun 
one.

So why don't you run the tests and see how good or how bad it is, rather than 
wasting time griping about something that isn't going to change unless and 
until Sun releases under a redistributable (by Fedora) license?

>  So you do understand the damage that shipping incompatible versions
>  causes... 
Of course I do.  But I also understand the reasons that IcedTea is in F8 
instead of a Sun java.  I also understand that it is not hard to get a Sun 
java into F8 (once a few things are worked around, and the systems provided 
in F8 are used).

>  Even Sun could have done a better job with versioning the code and
>  providing backwards compatibility. 
And that's the point: java compatibility issues are not isolated to IcedTea or 
gcj.

>  > Ever try a real Korn shell on different platforms?
>
>  I used it on AT&T sysvr4, but only with Bourne-compatible syntax since I
>  didn't expect it to be available everywhere. 
I mention the real Korn shell since it is even available for F8; also on 
Solaris, HP-UX, and others.  Particularly since Bash is not a Bourne shell 
(strictly speaking), I use as an example a shell that can be used to isolate 
compatibility differences to things outside the shell itself.

>  > You'd hate that system;
>  > depending upon the setting of an environment variable, you had different
>  > shells, different sets of programs, and different behaviors (SysV, BSD,
>  > or Aegis). 
>  Did any of the settings fail with Bourne-compatible syntax?  
Yes, since the default behavior (of the version I had) was to make the 
c-shell /bin/sh if in BSD mode, and the Bourne shell /bin/sh if in SysV mode; 
a shell script could change the environment variable within itself, then 
morph from a Bourne script to a csh script, then change the envvar back and 
resume processing as a Bourne script.  

Yes, that is very broken, but it was the case on the DN3500 with DomainOS 10.2 
(with AutoCAD on it; that was why the machine existed) I worked on.  The 
$PATH had the envvar embedded in various paths; the default /bin 
(and /usr/bin) was a variably symlinked (yes, an embedded envvar inside the 
symlink!) directory, with three possible targets: one the SysVR3-compatible 
one, one the 4.3BSD-compatible one, and one the Aegis (the previous Apollo 
environment) one.  Oh, and Apollo DomainOS had a great gui, but it wasn't X11 
(which had to be added separately): instead of xterms, you had what were 
known as 'pads' which are much like xterms of serious steroids.  It was a big 
enough target that AutoDesk built for it (in the late 1980's).

People who complain that Linux distribution differences are like the old unix 
war-era differences don't know what they're talking about; Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, 
Fedora, etc are all much more alike than they are different; the various 
competing Unixen of the late 80's and early 90's were more different than 
they were alike.  Even in the case of SCO Unix versus SCO Xenix; same 
company, quite different Unix variants (Xenix, of course, being the 
Microsoft-licensed Unix derivative sold to the old SCO).
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Ed Greshko]

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
> >>>   
> >>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small
> >> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that
> >> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the
> >> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to
> >> allow the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing
> >> the work. Look at my new messages on java.
> > ----
> > nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.
>
>  On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of
>  java on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be
>  right that it shouldn't be that way...
>  
Ah, yes...now I understand.  1+1=2 except in cases where it does not
actually equal 1 but may = something less or more than 1 if it happens
to be the 3rd Sunday in a month that has a even numbered Thursday.


-- 
Now, my ENTIRE LIFE is flashing before my EYES as I park my DODGE DART
in your EXXON service area for a COMPLETE LUBRICATION!!

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 09:55 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  >>>   
>  >>     You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small 
>  >> java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
>  >> broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
>  >> tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow 
>  >> the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work. 
>  >> Look at my new messages on java.
>  > ----
>  > nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.
>  
>  On the contrary - he has given the definitive 'user experience' of java 
>  on fedora.  He knows exactly what that experience is.  You may be right 
>  that it shouldn't be that way... 
----
ROFLMAO!!!

Seriously though, you can't hide behind Karl to make the point that
people are confused because if that were true, we'd all be using
Windows.

Craig

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  This isn't something you have to guess about.  There is a
> compatibility
>  test. 
Have you run any tests against icedtea?  Which specific ones failed?  Were 
bugs filed in bugzilla about them?

>  There are different versions with different tests.  Sun is the
> authority
>  on this unless that have given that up recently.  The fact that this
>  isn't clear shows just how badly the fake versions have damaged the name. 
We here have had Java compatibility problems with this app since before gcj, 
icedtea, or other FOSS solutions were available.  The most notorious, of 
course, was Microsoft's java, which didn't work at all.  We learned that we 
had to specify a particular JRE, and we provide information about this issue 
during our training workshops.  This is just the applet; the servlet is even 
more version-sensitive (we are doing telescope control using custom hardware; 
JRE/JDK upgrades are very touchy, even inside a major JDK version).

>  That's a different - and solvable - issue.  If a replacement
> shell did
>  something different internally, like removing quotes before expanding
>  wildcards you'd get the kind of damage that an incompatible java
>  interpreter can do. 
Ever try a real Korn shell on different platforms?  Specifically, ever tried 
it on an Apollo DomainOS 10 or later system?  You'd hate that system; 
depending upon the setting of an environment variable, you had different 
shells, different sets of programs, and different behaviors (SysV, BSD, or 
Aegis).

But that's a different story.
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 07:27 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Peter Boy wrote:
>  > Am Sonntag, den 30.12.2007, 12:49 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
>  >   
>  >> It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of this 
>  >> choice instead of blindly defending it.
>  >>     
>  > As with most decisions in real life: most benefits in one dimension have
>  > drawbacks in others. If I want the freedom of free software, I may have
>  > to struggle with issues in using non-free software. It is simply a
>  > matter of choice (and conscious decision).
>  >
>  >   
>  >>> Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora
> choosed
>  >>> not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
>  >>>       
>  >> They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it 
>  >> difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one 
>  >> problem.  
>  >>     
>  >
>  > Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. You may install the Sun
>  > provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
>  > doesn't work out of the box (doesn't work in any Linux distribution, the
>  > bug report is some years old and Sun choosed not to fix it), install one
>  > of the suggested workarounds (e.g. edit a shell script
>  > in /etc/profile.d) and you are ready to go. As with any distributions
>  > Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution.
>  > Third party vendors have to care ybout their software.
>  >
>  > And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat takes care
>  > about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. Or the
>  > former SuSE distribution where SuSE made a different regarding the
>  > licence issue.
>  >
>  >   
>  >> A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix 
>  >> this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the 
>  >> distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal 
>  >> symlinks.
>  >>     
>  >
>  > You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
>  > for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
>  > Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
>  > specific one.
>  >
>  >
>  >   
>  >> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable 
>  >>   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an 
>  >> incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name 
>  >> and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java 
>  >> program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and 
>  >> shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm 
>  >> surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>  >>     
>  >
>  > The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
>  > scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
>  > the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
>  > intermediate state during development. All this is quite different.
>  >
>  >
>  >   
>  >>> So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
>  >>> you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
>  >>> parallel. That's the Fedora way.
>  >>>       
>  >> It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
>  >>     
>  >
>  > You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
>  > have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways.
>  >
>  >
>  > Peter
>  >
>  >   
>      You guys are both wrong. Fedora does ship F7 and F8 with a small 
>  java version 1.5 which is too old for newer java programs, and that 
>  broken icedtea that does nothing good. But light at the end of the 
>  tunnel. Fedora can make the necessary changes to their design to allow 
>  the method given on the Sun Site to work. I have been doing the work. 
>  Look at my new messages on java. 
----
nice of you to weigh in on something you know absolutely nothing about.

Craig

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 06:50 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  On Thursday 03 January 2008, Peter Boy wrote:
>  >Am Sonntag, den 30.12.2007, 12:49 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
>  >> It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of this
>  >> choice instead of blindly defending it.
>  >
>  >As with most decisions in real life: most benefits in one dimension have
>  >drawbacks in others. If I want the freedom of free software, I may have
>  >to struggle with issues in using non-free software. It is simply a
>  >matter of choice (and conscious decision).
>  >
>  >> > Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..." but Fedora
> choosed
>  >> > not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
>  >>
>  >> They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it
>  >> difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one
>  >> problem.
>  >
>  >Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. You may install the Sun
>  >provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
>  >doesn't work out of the box (doesn't work in any Linux distribution, the
>  >bug report is some years old and Sun choosed not to fix it), install one
>  >of the suggested workarounds (e.g. edit a shell script
>  >in /etc/profile.d) and you are ready to go. As with any distributions
>  >Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution.
>  >Third party vendors have to care ybout their software.
>  >
>  >And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat takes care
>  >about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. Or the
>  >former SuSE distribution where SuSE made a different regarding the
>  >licence issue.
>  >
>  >> A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix
>  >> this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the
>  >> distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal
>  >> symlinks.
>  >
>  >You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
>  >for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
>  >Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
>  >specific one.
>  >
>  >> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
>  >>   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an
>  >> incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
>  >> and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java
>  >> program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
>  >> shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm
>  >> surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>  >
>  >The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
>  >scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
>  >the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
>  >intermediate state during development. All this is quite different.
>  >
>  >> > So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference version and
>  >> > you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
>  >> > parallel. That's the Fedora way.
>  >>
>  >> It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test.
>  >
>  >You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
>  >have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways.
>  
>  Here, with a fresh install of x86_64 on my lappy, an about:plugins gives a 
>  long list of IcedTea stuff.
>  
>  So I sent FF off to http://www.cnn.com.  Clicking on the first video in the 
>  list, it said I needed flash, so I clicked on the download button.  Then I 
>  became root and installed it, and restarted FF.  It was there in the about 
>  list, so I went back to cnn.com and they all played just fine.
>  
>  Now, this thread was saying what about IcedTea? 
----
thanks for you analysis but this thread was about java, not flash. what
does CNN and flash have to do with java? Absolutely nothing

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Lamar Owen wrote:

> > I'd just like some truth-in-advertising here.  Don't call
> it java until
> > it is - and realize it is just as damaging as if would be if someone
> > replaced your /bin/sh with an incompatible replacement.
>  
>  LOL.
>  
>  Having a moderately complex (2.9MB .war) java applet/servlet combo in 
>  production here, I laugh at this.  Sun's Java isn't even compatible with 
>  itself!  (JRE 1.4 -> 1.5 broke our app; 1.5->1.6 broke our app; etc)
>  
>  So, Les, just what is 'java'?  Which version? 
This isn't something you have to guess about.  There is a compatibility 
test.

>  Hrmph, I've seen numerous Java apps and applets that work fine on
> a 1.4 JRE (I 
>  even have one app, quite old, that requires a 1.3 JRE) and will not even 
>  start with 1.5, much less 1.6 or 1.7.
>  
>  So, again, what IS 'Java' and how does one measure compatibility? 
There are different versions with different tests.  Sun is the authority 
on this unless that have given that up recently.  The fact that this 
isn't clear shows just how badly the fake versions have damaged the name.

>  Oh, and just because you have a 'compatible' /bin/sh
> doesn't mean your shell 
>  scripts will run.  Shell script compatibility depends upon having the same 
>  set of shell library commands available; this can vary even between one 
>  Fedora 8 install and another one.  So /bin/sh compatibility is a strawman, as 
>  100% shell script compatibility doesn't exist (just try to run an old .shar 
>  that needs uudecode on a modern Linux). 
That's a different - and solvable - issue.  If a replacement shell did 
something different internally, like removing quotes before expanding 
wildcards you'd get the kind of damage that an incompatible java 
interpreter can do.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Lamar Owen]

On Thursday 03 January 2008, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  I'd just like some truth-in-advertising here.  Don't call it
> java until
>  it is - and realize it is just as damaging as if would be if someone
>  replaced your /bin/sh with an incompatible replacement. 
LOL.

Having a moderately complex (2.9MB .war) java applet/servlet combo in 
production here, I laugh at this.  Sun's Java isn't even compatible with 
itself!  (JRE 1.4 -> 1.5 broke our app; 1.5->1.6 broke our app; etc)

So, Les, just what is 'java'?  Which version?

Hrmph, I've seen numerous Java apps and applets that work fine on a 1.4 JRE (I 
even have one app, quite old, that requires a 1.3 JRE) and will not even 
start with 1.5, much less 1.6 or 1.7.

So, again, what IS 'Java' and how does one measure compatibility?

Oh, and just because you have a 'compatible' /bin/sh doesn't mean your shell 
scripts will run.  Shell script compatibility depends upon having the same 
set of shell library commands available; this can vary even between one 
Fedora 8 install and another one.  So /bin/sh compatibility is a strawman, as 
100% shell script compatibility doesn't exist (just try to run an old .shar 
that needs uudecode on a modern Linux).
-- 
Lamar Owen
Chief Information Officer
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
[phone]
www.pari.edu

[Peter Boy]

Am Sonntag, den 30.12.2007, 12:49 -0600 schrieb Les Mikesell:
>  It would be better if you tried to understand the consequences of
> this 
>  choice instead of blindly defending it. 
As with most decisions in real life: most
benefits in one dimension have
drawbacks in others. If I want the freedom of free software, I may have
to struggle with issues in using non-free software. It is simply a
matter of choice (and conscious decision).

>  > Fedora did not choose "not to be compatible with..."
> but Fedora choosed
>  > not to include an non-free program (i.e. Sun's Java)
>  
>  They did both.  Including or not including isn't the issue.  Making it 
>  difficult for the user to install his own freely available copy is one 
>  problem.   
Fedora does not make it specifically difficult. You may install the Sun
provided Linux rpm, are free to search the Sun bugzilla database why it
doesn't work out of the box (doesn't work in any Linux distribution, the
bug report is some years old and Sun choosed not to fix it), install one
of the suggested workarounds (e.g. edit a shell script
in /etc/profile.d) and you are ready to go. As with any distributions
Fedora does only care about software, which is part of its distribution.
Third party vendors have to care ybout their software.

And don't confuse the Fedora model with RHEL. In RHEL Red Hat takes care
about Sun java integration and customers have to pay for it. Or the
former SuSE distribution where SuSE made a different regarding the
licence issue.

>  A whole separate 'jpackage' project has to exist just to fix
>
>  this problem in the distribution. The problem wouldn't exist if the 
>  distribution included a java-*-sun-compat package of perfectly legal 
>  symlinks. 
You may think of the jpackage distribution as just another workaround
for the fact that Sun didn't care about Linux compatibility of their
Linus rpm's. And it is a general purpose workaround, not a Fedora
specific one.


>  The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java
> compatable 
>    but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an 
>  incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name 
>  and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java 
>  program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and 
>  shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm 
>  surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name. 
The software is not shipped as java, but as gcj (and with some starter
scripts with the filenama java for compatibility). And in contrast to MS
the gcj project aimed to full compatibility and the lack thereof was an
intermediate state during development. All this is quite different.


>  > So you can develope (or simply run) against the reference
> version and
>  > you can test (and support the devel of) the truly free alternative in
>  > parallel. That's the Fedora way.
>  
>  It's not an alternative java until it passes the compatibility test. 
You are free, not to use (and just to ignore) it! Remember, you just
have to use one of the above mentioned alternative ways.


Peter

[Cameron Simpson]

On 01Jan2008 09:10, Karl Larsen <k5di(a)zianet.com&gt; wrote:
> > If you are doing a default x86 Sun JDK install, you will find
> the
> > distributables in /usr/java/jdk.../bin directory. If you are using Java
> > 6 then you should also see /usr/java/default and /usr/java/latest
> > symlinks pointing to the Java6 directory.
> >
> > You could add /usr/java/default/bin to your path (either by modifying
> > /etc/profile file, or in any other file that you use to setup your
> > environment)
> >
> > Now, you should be able to run whatever command that you wanted to run:
> > 	java -jar XYZ.jar
> >
> > Rogue
> >   
>  Hi Rogue, I would never guessed the above. Turns out you need to be using a 
>  root login. 
No, you should _not_ have to be root. In fact, you should try quite hard
to avoid being root when not doing system administration.

| But I have the jEdit installed but now reading the man page to 
>  see how to do it :-) 
Always a good start.

>  Thank you so much. I was sure that having no /usr/bin/jar meant I did
>
>  something wrong. But the new stuff takes new ways. Thanks a lot! 
The other thing you should bear in mind is that "jar" is a tool like
"ar",
"tar" or "zip" - it constructs, inspects or unpacks ".jar"
files.

To _run_ a java program you want the "java" command.

Usually a Java app is distributed as a jar file, an archive containing the
program, and the command "java -jar foo.jar" is used to run it.

You still need "java" in your $PATH, or to invoke "java" explicitly
(eg
"/usr/java/bin/java") if it is not in your $PATH. Usually it is desirable to
adjust your $PATH you include this stuff, saving painful long paths later.

Both "java" and "jar" have manual pages, quite good ones. If java in
installed out of the "vendor" area (here "vendor" means redhat/fedora
and "/usr/bin" is part of their area - that they expect a free hand
in), you will need to adjust your $MANPATH to include the "..../man"
directory of wherever the java package is installed, much as you have to
adjust $PATH to include the "..../bin" directory to run "java"
without
using the full path of the command.

Cheers,
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs(a)zip.com.au&gt; DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

[Ed Greshko]

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Hi Rogue, I would never guessed the above. Turns out you need to be
>  using a root login. But I have the jEdit installed but now reading the
>  man page to see how to do it :-) 
No need to use root here in Taiwan.
>   Thank you so much. I was sure that having no /usr/bin/jar meant I
> did
>  something wrong. But the new stuff takes new ways. Thanks a lot!
>  
Actually, I'm pretty sure you are doing somethings wrong.  Which ones
they are, it is impossible to determine.  However, I can see you digging
yourself a bigger and bigger hole and eventually blaming it on the
Fedora project.  As in almost any OS the developers strive to keep you
from shooting yourself in the foot but if the person behind the keyboard
is bound and determined to shoot themselves they are perfectly capable
of doing so.



Star Trek Lives!

-- 
Star Trek Lives!

[Ed Greshko]

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Ed Greshko wrote:
> > Karl Larsen wrote:
> >  
> >> Les Mikesell wrote:
> >>    
> >>> Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>>>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the            
>
> >>    Returning to Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site.
> >> It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign
> >> something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.
> >>
> >>    I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the
> >> Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do
> >> this:
> >>
> >> $ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >>
> >> but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked
> >> but on F8 it doesn't.
> >>
> >> What have I done wrong?
> >>
> >>     
> > I don't know what you did wrong.  But on my F8 system I did install
> > Sun's jdk (jdk-6u3-linux-i586.rpm)
> > and there is /usr/bin/jar.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   
>     I looked and no /usr/bin/jar but there is a /usr/bin/java which
>  lead to gij which seems to work but not. It did this:
>
>  [karl@k5di Desktop]$ gij jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>  Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>  jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>    at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
>  Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>  not found in gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader{urls=[file:./],
>  parent=gnu.gcj.runtime.ExtensionClassLoader{urls=[], parent=null}}
>    at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
>  [karl@k5di Desktop]$
>
>  It appears that the jedit file may be bad. 
Nope...

java -jar jedit42install.jar

Works just fine here...
>  Geeze 
Yes...but for a different reason.  :-)
>  Karl
>
>  

-- 
To him breathing was an intellectual that had to be concentrated on. He
could just manage one nostril at a time at the moment. (Hogfather)

[Karl Larsen]

Ed Greshko wrote:
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>    
> > Les Mikesell wrote:
> >     
> >> Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >>
> >>       
> >>>>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the 
> >>>>>             
> >    Returning to Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site.
> > It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign
> > something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.
> >
> >    I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the
> > Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do
> > this:
> >
> > $ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >
> > but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked
> > but on F8 it doesn't.
> >
> > What have I done wrong?
> >
> >     
>  I don't know what you did wrong.  But on my F8 system I did install
>  Sun's jdk (jdk-6u3-linux-i586.rpm)
>  and there is /usr/bin/jar.
>
>
>
>
>     
    I looked and no /usr/bin/jar but there is a /usr/bin/java which lead 
to gij which seems to work but not. It did this:

[karl@k5di Desktop]$ gij jedit4.3pre12install.jar
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: 
jedit4.3pre12install.jar
   at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: jedit4.3pre12install.jar 
not found in gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader{urls=[file:./], 
parent=gnu.gcj.runtime.ExtensionClassLoader{urls=[], parent=null}}
   at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
   at gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
   at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
   at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
   at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
[karl@k5di Desktop]$

It appears that the jedit file may be bad.

Geeze

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Rogue]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Ed Greshko wrote:
> > Karl Larsen wrote:
> >  
> >> Les Mikesell wrote:
> >>    
> >>> Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>>>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the            
>
> >>    Returning to Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site.
> >> It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign
> >> something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.
> >>
> >>    I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the
> >> Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do
> >> this:
> >>
> >> $ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar
> >>
> >> but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked
> >> but on F8 it doesn't.
> >>
> >> What have I done wrong?
> >>
> >>     
> > I don't know what you did wrong.  But on my F8 system I did install
> > Sun's jdk (jdk-6u3-linux-i586.rpm)
> > and there is /usr/bin/jar.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   
>     I looked and no /usr/bin/jar but there is a /usr/bin/java which lead
>  to gij which seems to work but not. It did this:
>  
>  [karl@k5di Desktop]$ gij jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>  Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError:
>  jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>    at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
>  Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: jedit4.3pre12install.jar
>  not found in gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader{urls=[file:./],
>  parent=gnu.gcj.runtime.ExtensionClassLoader{urls=[], parent=null}}
>    at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at gnu.gcj.runtime.SystemClassLoader.findClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(libgcj.so.8rh)
>    at gnu.java.lang.MainThread.run(libgcj.so.8rh)
>  [karl@k5di Desktop]$
>  
>  It appears that the jedit file may be bad.
>  
>  Geeze
>  
>  Karl
>  
>   
Karl,

If you are doing a default x86 Sun JDK install, you will find the
distributables in /usr/java/jdk.../bin directory. If you are using Java
6 then you should also see /usr/java/default and /usr/java/latest
symlinks pointing to the Java6 directory.

You could add /usr/java/default/bin to your path (either by modifying
/etc/profile file, or in any other file that you use to setup your
environment)

Now, you should be able to run whatever command that you wanted to run:
	java -jar XYZ.jar

HTH,
Rogue
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFHelRjceS9IQvx51YRAhTSAJ4qKIW6nWbvLTTodCxmoE4lTReC0gCfXD2p
> Unhj2PsZEy4WaNkLSSfsAYE=
> =FbJ7
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Karl Larsen]

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
>
> >>> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the  
    Returning to
Java, I have installed the one from the Sun web site. 
It is an rpm with a wrapper that allows them to force you to sign 
something. Then it installs something but it must be incomplete.

    I want java so I can load jedit so I can write to the wiki at the 
Fedora Doc's site. It is supposed to be simple. The jedit site said do this:

$ jar jedit4.3pre12install.jar

but alas there is no active jar on my Fedora. Earlier Fedora it worked 
but on F8 it doesn't.

What have I done wrong?

Karl
 

-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Antonio Olivares]

>  Restrictions to stop abuse, removal of rights by
>  third parties and
>  to produce greater freedom. You could say the same
>  of the US consitution.
>  After all why should the president not be able to
>  cancel elections, they
>  interfere with his freedom to innovate foreign
>  policy.
>  
1.  Because our president is an idiot, and even if he
were not, that would extend beyond his duties.^*
2.  Take Venezuela's president as another example, 
Bush would do the same thing if he could, but he would
not admit to it.^*
3.  take a careful look at the Patriot Act as well, it
infringes on many of the rights that the US
Constitution holds to be true because of #1 ^*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act
4.  How in the world could he innovate his foreign
policy where very few to none of the nations in the
world appreciate him as a world leader?  
5.  People on this list are very sharp and can
add/subtract comments here justifying for/against what
are my $0.02 on the president's rights to suspend
elections.^*
6.  As for GPL restrictions/conditions the licenses
are there for serveral reasons, to protect the
author's work and for that work to be shared across
the board in the advancement of technology so that no
one person/corporation controls the code and what you
and I can/cannot use.  The great thing is that it is
"Open Source", 
http://opensource.org/docs/osd

and here you can see all the open source licenses 
http://opensource.org/licenses

*I apologize to all for replying to this thread that
should die, because it is not going anywhere and many
on this list have better topics to look at.  Also it
has deviated from the OP's "java problem"

Regards,

Antonio 


     
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Craig White]

On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 16:32 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  > You could say the same of the US consitution.
>  > After all why should the president not be able to cancel elections,
>  they
>  > interfere with his freedom to innovate foreign policy.
>  
>  Be careful what you suggest...  The constitution hasn't stopped the 
>  administration from creating a special class of people who are
>  permitted 
>  to invade privacy with no balancing oversight.  I'd expect them to be 
>  using any information they collect to suit their own agenda. 
----
It isn't up to the constitution to stop the administration from doing
anything. The constitution stipulates 3 purportedly co-equal branches of
our government (the executive, legislative and judicial) to provide the
checks and balances. Therefore, it's mostly the responsibility of the
legislative branch to assert themselves and thus far, they have
abdicated, undoubtedly for reasons far too complex to reasonably dissect
here.

The entire analogy has lost it's way.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:
> > I'm not the one who reversed the meaning of free to mean
> restricted. And 
> > the GPL is simply restrictions.
>  
>  Restrictions to stop abuse, removal of rights by third parties and
>  to produce greater freedom. 
They reduce both innovation and freedom.  If the original TCP/IP 
implementation had been encumbered with GPL restrictions, we probably 
would not be able to have this conversation today.

>  You could say the same of the US consitution.
>  After all why should the president not be able to cancel elections, they
>  interfere with his freedom to innovate foreign policy. 
Be careful what you suggest...  The constitution hasn't stopped the 
administration from creating a special class of people who are permitted 
to invade privacy with no balancing oversight.  I'd expect them to be 
using any information they collect to suit their own agenda.

> > of works - or keeping themselves from being improved in other
> ways.  The 
> > FSF even claims that it is illegal to distribute components separately 
> > that may be combined with GPL'd parts unless you apply the same 
> > restrictions.  That's like saying I can't give someone a cover for their 
> > copyrighted book or a frame for their painting.
>  
>  You should also perhaps have asked for a beginners book on copyright law
>  from Santa. Your analogies are totally broken. A frame is not a
>  derivative work, nor is a cover (usually). The GPL likewise does not
>  cover non-derivative works. 
I'm not aware of any books that would show a court's decision on a case 
like the FSF's claim in the RIPEM situation (a claim that code 
containing no covered code was derivative).

>  If you take from another work whether you make a cover by printing
> out a
>  photo from inside a book and colouring it in, or by using GPL code in
>  your code you end up with a derived work and the original author has
>  rights not too. 
It is clearly not legal to include a copy of covered works (although I 
contend that it harms all concerned when the same user is allowed to 
have a copy of the separate individual work anyway). However, I haven't 
seen anything except the FSF claim that when a user obtains his own copy 
of a covered work that its copyright can cover some other work written 
by someone else and distributed separately.  Has there ever been a court 
decision showing something not containing any covered material to be a 
derived work?

-- 
    Les Mikesell
     lesmikesesll(a)gmail.com

[Tim]

On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 14:15 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  It's no delusion that better things could exist if the GPL did
> not 
>  prohibit them, perhaps even things that would compete successfully
>  with The Monopoly. 
You are free to use some other *ix-like OS that isn't covered by the
GPL, and is *free* to do what you like with it.  But you'll find that
you've moved away from an OS with a large supportive following, and away
from one with a large supported hardware base.  There's a message in
that.

-- 
[tim@bigblack ~]$ uname -ipr
2.6.23.1-10.fc7 i686 i386

Using FC 4, 5, 6 & 7, plus CentOS 5.  Today, it's FC7.

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.

[Alan Cox]

>  I'm not the one who reversed the meaning of free to mean
> restricted. And 
>  the GPL is simply restrictions. 
Restrictions to stop abuse, removal of rights by third parties and
to produce greater freedom. You could say the same of the US consitution.
After all why should the president not be able to cancel elections, they
interfere with his freedom to innovate foreign policy.

>  of works - or keeping themselves from being improved in other ways. 
> The 
>  FSF even claims that it is illegal to distribute components separately 
>  that may be combined with GPL'd parts unless you apply the same 
>  restrictions.  That's like saying I can't give someone a cover for their 
>  copyrighted book or a frame for their painting. 
You should also perhaps have asked for a beginners book on copyright law
from Santa. Your analogies are totally broken. A frame is not a
derivative work, nor is a cover (usually). The GPL likewise does not
cover non-derivative works.

If you take from another work whether you make a cover by printing out a
photo from inside a book and colouring it in, or by using GPL code in
your code you end up with a derived work and the original author has
rights not too.

Alan

[Marko Vojinovic]

On Monday 31 December 2007 17:24, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Alan Cox wrote:
>  >> Sorry, I just don't understand the concept of _wanting_ to prevent the
>  >> distribution of improved versions of code and keeping others from having
>  >> it, while at the same time claiming it is free.
>  >
>  > Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any contributions
>  > under a licence that makes them free.
>
>  You mean restricted, don't you? 
Freedom implies responsibility, if it is not to turn into chaos. GPL 
restrictions are there to enforce that derived code be free in a responsible 
way.

Absolute freedom (ie. freedom without responsibility) is a Bad Thing. Just 
imagine that you write a piece of code from scratch, and release it on the 
web without *any* licence. It would be absolutely free. It would be so free, 
in fact, that nothing could prevent me from downloading it and claiming my 
own copyright or patent that forbids you to release it. While this is 
unethical, if you give me complete freedom, it is legal.

So the GPL licence is a way to balance restrictions vs. freedom in a way that 
ensures that the author is responsible (in an ethical sense) and prevents his 
code from being hijacked by a third party. You may question if this is 
well-balanced, but I believe that the "best" answer does not exist. And GPL 
does the job somehow. Maybe not without side-effects, but I cannot think of a 
way to remove all possible side-effects of any potential license that you 
might call "better".

Btw, I am not a pro on legal stuff, this is just my intuitive view of things.

:-)
Marko

Marko Vojinovic
Institute of Physics
University of Belgrade
======================
e-mail: vmarko(a)phy.bg.ac.yu

[Alan Cox]

>  > Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any
> contributions
>  > under a licence that makes them free.
>  
>  You mean restricted, don't you? 
If you are at the point where you conclude that people type the reverse
of the word they mean you have serious problems.

>  something better?  Any why assume that it would necessarily be
> charged 
>  for?  There are plenty of examples of non-GPL'd code that is freely 
>  available and no evidence that it can't stay that way. 
There are also very large numbers of examples where key parts did so,
particularly with modular code such as an OS.

>  It is not illegal, but it takes code that permits future innovation
> and 
>  turns it into something that restricts it, harming everyone in the 
>  process.   
And the GPL exists to stop someone taking code and turning it into
something that restricts further, that is the heart of what it does,
which makes your delusions even stranger.

>  What?  Competition is a good thing, and necessary for freedom and 
>  innovation.  Preventing it is an act of restriction, not freedom. 
A competing book is not the another authors book reprinted and the money
pocketed. An innovative painting is not a copy of an existing work.

Alan

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

> > But, as for hijacking, can you assert that no work currently in
> Linux 
> > came from unrestricted *bsd style code and had GPL restrictions attached 
> > to further development, hindering additional innovation?  And that every 
> > contributor would have chosen to restrict distribution if it had not 
> > been necessary?
>  ----
>  language as persuasion is always worth watching. I seem to recall the
>  language of 'viral' being attached to GPL by that great champion of
>  software freedom...Steve Balmer so it does seem curious that you signed
>  on to that terminology. 
Some things are just obvious.

>  As a user of Linux, I am convinced that it is the GPL license that
> has
>  allowed Linux to become what it is today. 
If by 'what it is today', you mean crippled in comparison to OS's that 
include and encourage vendor-supplied drivers, I might agree.  If you 
mean 'more popular than *bsd based systems other than OS X', I'm 
convinced that happened because AT&T was suing BSDI at the time the 
popularity was established and the fate of the code base wasn't clear.

>  Your perspective on this list simply hasn't engendered any
> support. 
Before zfs perhaps there wasn't anything that jumped out at you as 
missing strictly due to GPL restrictions.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:

> >> Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the fact
> >> that the license prevents you from hijacking the code.
> > I'm not interested in hijacking anything.  I just want to be able to use
> > code that everyone has been given permission to use but not to
> > redistribute in creative, usable forms.  And since it can't be
> > distributed that way, it effectively can't be used.
> >
>  Let me see if I have this right - it is ok to distribute code in
>  binary without the source, and restrict how you can use it, but it
>  isn't ok to distribute the code with the source and restrict how you
>  can use it. 
GPL doesn't restrict how you can use things, just how you can share with 
others.

>  Or is it that you object sharing your code in order for
>  you to be able to use the code the author has shared with the
>  condition that you do so? 
I object to being unable to share combinations of less restricted code 
and GPL'd code.

>  It sounds like what you are objecting to
>  is the author licensing the code is a way that doesn't let you be
>  selfish if you want to use it in your project. 
Selfishness has nothing to do with anything.  I want everyone to have 
access to the innovations that would have been possible without the GPL 
restrictions on combining works.

>  If you want to use
>  code that carries a GPL license in a non-GPL project, contact the
>  author(s) for a license that works with what you want to do. (Oh
>  wait - then you might have to pay to use the code, and that would
>  cut into your profits...) 
I'm not interested in selling anything.  But, as an example of my 
objection, long ago I built a combination of gnutar compiled under DOS 
with a tcp library and scsi drivers linked in so you could use local or 
remote tape drives.  The other 2 libraries were freely available in 
source, but because of the GPL restriction on gnutar I could not give 
away the combined work.  These days the OS provides those services so 
that specific example is somewhat obsolete, but the principle that 
useful combinations of freely available code are prohibited still 
stands, the most obvious one today being zfs in Linux.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 11:01 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Alan Cox wrote:
>  >>> Open Solaris
>  >> Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral 
>  >> nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be 
>  >> available for any use.
>  > 
>  > Strange use of the word "hijack". The licence was decided by the code
>  > author, so it would be like saying someone hijacked their own car. The
>  > licence, if anything, stops Sun hijacking their work.
>  
>  Sorry, I just don't understand the concept of _wanting_ to prevent the 
>  distribution of improved versions of code and keeping others from having 
>  it, while at the same time claiming it is free.
>  
>  But, as for hijacking, can you assert that no work currently in Linux 
>  came from unrestricted *bsd style code and had GPL restrictions attached 
>  to further development, hindering additional innovation?  And that every 
>  contributor would have chosen to restrict distribution if it had not 
>  been necessary? 
----
language as persuasion is always worth watching. I seem to recall the
language of 'viral' being attached to GPL by that great champion of
software freedom...Steve Balmer so it does seem curious that you signed
on to that terminology.

As a user of Linux, I am convinced that it is the GPL license that has
allowed Linux to become what it is today.

Your perspective on this list simply hasn't engendered any support.

Craig

[Mikkel]

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
>  
> >>> you can run ZFS AND not have to deal with messy GPL kernel...it's
> >>> called
> >>> Open Solaris
> >> Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral
> >> nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be
> >> available for any use.
> >>
> > So, use the drivers from the hardware manufacture. The authors of
> > the Linux drivers have the right to decide how there work is used.
>  
>  No they don't.  The only way to contribute code to a GPL'd project is
>  under the GPL.
>   
But you were talking about Open Solaris, and not being able to use
GPL drivers in Open Solaris. Now, there is nothing stopping the
author from licensing their code under more then one license. There
is a fair amount of code licensed under more then one license.
Remember, you can have more then one license of the right to copy an
author's work...
> > I
> > don't hear you complaining that the Windows drivers can not be used,
> > but there are even more restrictive - you can not even look at the
> > code.
>  
>  NDISwrapper sort-of, sometimes works.
>  
> > Your complaints about the GPL always boil down to the fact
> > that the license prevents you from hijacking the code.
>  
>  I'm not interested in hijacking anything.  I just want to be able to use
>  code that everyone has been given permission to use but not to
>  redistribute in creative, usable forms.  And since it can't be
>  distributed that way, it effectively can't be used.
>   
Let me see if I have this right - it is ok to distribute code in
binary without the source, and restrict how you can use it, but it
isn't ok to distribute the code with the source and restrict how you
can use it. Or is it that you object sharing your code in order for
you to be able to use the code the author has shared with the
condition that you do so? It sounds like what you are objecting to
is the author licensing the code is a way that doesn't let you be
selfish if you want to use it in your project. If you want to use
code that carries a GPL license in a non-GPL project, contact the
author(s) for a license that works with what you want to do. (Oh
wait - then you might have to pay to use the code, and that would
cut into your profits...)

Mikkel
-- 

  Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:

> > Sorry, I just don't understand the concept of _wanting_ to
> prevent the 
> > distribution of improved versions of code and keeping others from having 
> > it, while at the same time claiming it is free.
>  
>  Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any contributions
>  under a licence that makes them free. 
You mean restricted, don't you?

>  Without this the trend would be for
>  every driver to be non-free, then charged for and then there would be no
>  Linux. 
You mean there could be something better than Linux, otherwise there 
would be no reason for Linux to go away.  That's the part I don't 
understand.  Why don't you want to give the world a chance to have 
something better?  Any why assume that it would necessarily be charged 
for?  There are plenty of examples of non-GPL'd code that is freely 
available and no evidence that it can't stay that way.

>  Freedom is an active not a passive thing. 
Restrictions are active, I guess.  Preventing innovation is active.

>  As to BSD code - the BSD licence specifically permits people to
> create
>  GPL only derivatives - so that is hardly hijacking. 
It is not illegal, but it takes code that permits future innovation and 
turns it into something that restricts it, harming everyone in the 
process.  So I still call it hijacking.

>  It may be neccessary
>  to stop a third party then producing binary only non-free improvements
>  and destroying the freedom. 
What?  Competition is a good thing, and necessary for freedom and 
innovation.  Preventing it is an act of restriction, not freedom.

>  Inaction does not create freedom. 
Nor does preventing innovation and competition.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:
> >> Open Solaris
> > Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral 
> > nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be 
> > available for any use.
>  
>  Strange use of the word "hijack". The licence was decided by the code
>  author, so it would be like saying someone hijacked their own car. The
>  licence, if anything, stops Sun hijacking their work. 
Sorry, I just don't understand the concept of _wanting_ to prevent the 
distribution of improved versions of code and keeping others from having 
it, while at the same time claiming it is free.

But, as for hijacking, can you assert that no work currently in Linux 
came from unrestricted *bsd style code and had GPL restrictions attached 
to further development, hindering additional innovation?  And that every 
contributor would have chosen to restrict distribution if it had not 
been necessary?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Alan Cox]

On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 11:01:49 -0600
>  Sorry, I just don't understand the concept of _wanting_ to
> prevent the 
>  distribution of improved versions of code and keeping others from having 
>  it, while at the same time claiming it is free. 
Its really very simple. The GPL requires you provide any contributions
under a licence that makes them free. Without this the trend would be for
every driver to be non-free, then charged for and then there would be no
Linux.

Freedom is an active not a passive thing.

As to BSD code - the BSD licence specifically permits people to create
GPL only derivatives - so that is hardly hijacking. It may be neccessary
to stop a third party then producing binary only non-free improvements
and destroying the freedom.

Inaction does not create freedom.

Alan

[Alan Cox]

>  No they don't.  The only way to contribute code to a GPL'd
> project is 
>  under the GPL. 
Which is what the authors of the rest of the code your are deriving from
decided. If your project isn't derivative then its up to you how you
licence it, but you don't get to use other peoples code for that whether
Linux or Windows.

Alan

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
>  On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 00:20 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> > Craig White wrote:
> >> This more or less replicates Les' contentiousness towards GNU and GPL
> >> license stuff because he is desperately interested in running
> >> proprietary software without hassle and blames kernel developers, GPL
> >> license and Red Hat / Fedora packages for the problems which come from
> >> vendors who want to only provide binary software.
> > That's a tiny subset of the real problem of the GPL.  Consider that it 
> > also prevents you from having zfs in the Linux kernel, zfs being neither 
> > proprietary nor distributed only in binary.  And that's just the obvious 
> > thing you might know about and want today.  The number of possible 
> > combinations of things it prevents from being distributed are actually 
> > astronomical.
>  ----
>  I certainly hope so Ollie
>  
>  you can run ZFS AND not have to deal with messy GPL kernel...it's called
>  Open Solaris 
Which can't use device drivers that have GPL restrictions - the viral 
nature of the GPL has hijacked much of the work that would otherwise be 
available for any use.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Mon, 2007-12-31 at 00:20 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  > 
>  > This more or less replicates Les' contentiousness towards GNU and GPL
>  > license stuff because he is desperately interested in running
>  > proprietary software without hassle and blames kernel developers, GPL
>  > license and Red Hat / Fedora packages for the problems which come from
>  > vendors who want to only provide binary software.
>  
>  That's a tiny subset of the real problem of the GPL.  Consider that it 
>  also prevents you from having zfs in the Linux kernel, zfs being neither 
>  proprietary nor distributed only in binary.  And that's just the obvious 
>  thing you might know about and want today.  The number of possible 
>  combinations of things it prevents from being distributed are actually 
>  astronomical. 
----
I certainly hope so Ollie

you can run ZFS AND not have to deal with messy GPL kernel...it's called
Open Solaris

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
>  
>  This more or less replicates Les' contentiousness towards GNU and GPL
>  license stuff because he is desperately interested in running
>  proprietary software without hassle and blames kernel developers, GPL
>  license and Red Hat / Fedora packages for the problems which come from
>  vendors who want to only provide binary software. 
That's a tiny subset of the real problem of the GPL.  Consider that it 
also prevents you from having zfs in the Linux kernel, zfs being neither 
proprietary nor distributed only in binary.  And that's just the obvious 
thing you might know about and want today.  The number of possible 
combinations of things it prevents from being distributed are actually 
astronomical.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
     lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 22:27 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  On Sunday 30 December 2007, Craig White wrote:
>  >On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 15:16 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  >> On Sunday 30 December 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  >> >Les Mikesell wrote:
>  >> >> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java
>  >> >> compatable but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to
>  >> >> promote an incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with
>  >> >> the java name and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The
>  >> >> fedora-shipped not-java program that executes with the java name does
>  >> >> just as much damage and shouldn't be named java until it passes
> the
>  >> >> compatibility tests.  I'm surprised fedora's legal dept.
> allowed this
>  >> >> abuse of a trademarked name.
>  >> >
>  >> >That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't
>  >> >consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used
>  >> >the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort.
>  >> >IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in
>  >> >Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to
>  >> >remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes
>  >> >completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.
>  >> >
>  >> >Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
>  >> >until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
>  >> >paved the way to better compatibility.
>  >> >
>  >> >http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-
>  >> >jav a/
>  >> >
>  >> >Rahul
>  >>
>  >> Excellent news, Rahul.  Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe?
>  >
>  >----
>  >you should have followed the links in the article which would have
>  >brought you to...
>  >
>  >http://labs.jboss.com/community/interviews/sacha_sun.html
>  >
>  >which actually answers that and more
>  >
>  >Craig
>  
>  Maybe.  The pointlessness of this thread seems lost on about half the posters 
>  though.  Generally speaking, I'm in the same camp as Les, I just want it to 
>  work.  If I have to go put a virtual quarter in the meter, so be it.  All the 
>  political posturing in the world is of little or no use to the majority of us 
>  if it results in something being non-functional when it works flawlessly for 
>  the other 97% of the people on this planet running a windwoes install, legal 
>  or not. 
----
evidently you have missed some of the finer points of this discussion.
First off, it wasn't Windows but rather Solaris where Sun's Java works
across the board.

Secondly, while Sun audits the code and releases the code as GPL, this
code now has a home on Fedora 8 and future Fedora & Red Hat releases.

Thirdly, Les is complaining about the GNU version of java which actually
permits all of the various software to run cross platform which may not
be significant to you but it does mean that my various Macintosh PPC's
can actually run java programs and I would be sucking wind if I was
waiting for Sun to release a version of Java that works on Fedora on a
PPC.

This more or less replicates Les' contentiousness towards GNU and GPL
license stuff because he is desperately interested in running
proprietary software without hassle and blames kernel developers, GPL
license and Red Hat / Fedora packages for the problems which come from
vendors who want to only provide binary software.

Craig

[Paul Shaffer]

I started following this thread to maybe gain some insight on the (java) ***subject***.
   
  Have you guys checked the ***subject*** recently?
   
  Now it has degenerated into a bickering match of unrelated crap.
   
  Knock it off, boneheads!
   
  v/r
   
  Paul

David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:

>  
>  Thanks for the diversion. You remind me of a salesman trying to
>  up-sale a customer a back hoe when all he needs to get the job done is
>  a shovel. 
In American English we say "huh?" What the heck does that statement mean?

You want to run Fedora X as a server? Go for it! Knock yourself out!
Enjoy yourself. You don't want to usr Windows? Go for it! Knock yourself
out! Enjoy yourself.

But I ask again. Huh?
- --


David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd4C1IACgkQAO0wNI1X4QEyygCfSj2GlVwduBMp45+tifYPWgrJ
> RKEAoIWxd1GO80H4HxMtfcBAMjsMofMq
> =T/x0
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- 
-- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list


       
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:

>  Sorry, I hit the send key by accident. I was going to add that XP
> Home
>  is a stripped down OS so why drag it into the discussion? 

I don't know that "a stripped down OS" is a proper statement. XP Home
does exactly what it is supposed to do. Provide a usable, affordable OS
for the Windows home user. At a lower cost than the more expensive XP
PRO which is for an office type user that needs more features.

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd4AKMACgkQAO0wNI1X4QENdgCg8fQpaKnHnLBqOzj0XgByNqfG
> l8oAn355fbojdiw3b6qU6VBUxYCiarGN
> =tb6G
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:

>  
>  Thanks for the diversion. You remind me of a salesman trying to
>  up-sale a customer a back hoe when all he needs to get the job done is
>  a shovel. 
In American English we say "huh?" What the heck does that statement mean?

You want to run Fedora X as a server? Go for it! Knock yourself out!
Enjoy yourself. You don't want to usr Windows? Go for it! Knock yourself
out! Enjoy yourself.

But I ask again. Huh?
- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd4C1IACgkQAO0wNI1X4QEyygCfSj2GlVwduBMp45+tifYPWgrJ
> RKEAoIWxd1GO80H4HxMtfcBAMjsMofMq
> =T/x0
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 30, 2007 12:26 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 30, 2007 7:25 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  >> Hash: SHA1
>  >>
>  >> Kam Leo wrote:
>  >>
>  >>> Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
>  >>
>  >> Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
>  >>
>  >> "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
>  >> installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
>  >> Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
>  >> because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
>  >> the ISS from Windows 2000.
>  >>
>  >> ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
>  >> included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
>  >> not work with XP Home.
>  >
>  > What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
>  > applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either.
>
>
>  I really don't know what is normally done. But since XP PRO is a
>  *desktop* install I seriously doubt that "Apache, Samba and a whole host
>  of other applications" would be installed at all let alone by default.
>  Home is a stripped down PRO so I would think, even more, that these
>  would not be defaults.
>
>  If I wanted a Windows server I would use Windows 2003 which *is* a server.
>
>  As for Linux? If I wanted a server I would install RHEL or CentOS or one
>  of several other Linux server installations. I would *not* try to run a
>  Linux server system with Fedora. It changes too quickly and too often to
>  bother with in the long run. Thirteen months of support before EOL
>  compared to 3/4 years is a no brainer.
>
>  >
>  > How did XP Home get into this conversation?
>
>  XP Home and XP PRO are related. Home is XP without the office networking
>  stuff. Just what the name implies. XP for use by a home user. And you
>  mentioned it. Look about at your quoted section.
>
>    David 
Thanks for the diversion. You remind me of a salesman trying to
up-sale a customer a back hoe when all he needs to get the job done is
a shovel.

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 15:16 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>  On Sunday 30 December 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  >Les Mikesell wrote:
>  >> The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
>  >>  but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an
>  >> incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
>  >> and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java
>  >> program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
>  >> shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm
>  >> surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>  >
>  >That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't
>  >consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used
>  >the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort.
>  >IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in
>  >Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to
>  >remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes
>  >completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.
>  >
>  >Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
>  >until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
>  >paved the way to better compatibility.
>  >
>  >http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-jav
>  >a/
>  >
>  >Rahul
>  
>  Excellent news, Rahul.  Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe? 
----
you should have followed the links in the article which would have
brought you to...

http://labs.jboss.com/community/interviews/sacha_sun.html

which actually answers that and more

Craig

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 30, 2007 7:25 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Kam Leo wrote:
> >
> >> Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
> >
> > Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
> >
> > "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
> > installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
> > Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
> > because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
> > the ISS from Windows 2000.
> >
> > ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
> > included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
> > not work with XP Home.
>  
>  What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
>  applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either. 

I really don't know what is normally done. But since XP PRO is a
*desktop* install I seriously doubt that "Apache, Samba and a whole host
of other applications" would be installed at all let alone by default.
Home is a stripped down PRO so I would think, even more, that these
would not be defaults.

If I wanted a Windows server I would use Windows 2003 which *is* a server.

As for Linux? If I wanted a server I would install RHEL or CentOS or one
of several other Linux server installations. I would *not* try to run a
Linux server system with Fedora. It changes too quickly and too often to
bother with in the long run. Thirteen months of support before EOL
compared to 3/4 years is a no brainer.

>  
>  How did XP Home get into this conversation? 
XP Home and XP PRO are related. Home is XP without the office networking
stuff. Just what the name implies. XP for use by a home user. And you
mentioned it. Look about at your quoted section.

- --


  David


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd3/vgACgkQAO0wNI1X4QGL0wCg3ni7F58cJMMdkBOIzaKKeWpt
> magAn38eIQTRFX56jq26upQ6lBCJs1rp
> =kZMR
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Rahul Sundaram]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test
> suite which
> > until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
> > paved the way to better compatibility.
> >
> > http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-jav
> > a/
> >
> > Rahul
>  
>  Excellent news, Rahul.  Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe? 
IcedTea which is included already in Fedora 8 (and other distributions) 
already is as close as it gets to a 100% open source OpenJDK. Removing 
the remaining binary encumbrances from OpenJDK has been a slow process. 
Sun has licensed third party code which frequently needs to be entirely 
replaced with free and open source equivalents or written from scratch 
and plugged in. The agreement between Red Hat and Sun helps here but it 
is no magic bullet. There is ongoing work on this and IcedTea will 
continue to pull in the latest bits from OpenJDK. More details at

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Interviews/ThomasFitzsimmons

The other important reason to continue with a alternative implementation 
is the OpenJDK is currently x86 only while Fedora already supports 
x86_64 and PPC and more architecture support being added for upcoming 
releases.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures

Rahul

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 30, 2007 7:25 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>
>  > Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
>
>
>  Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
>
>  "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
>  installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
>  Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
>  because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
>  the ISS from Windows 2000.
>
>  ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
>  included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
>  not work with XP Home. 
What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either.

>    David 
How did XP Home get into this conversation?

[Gene Heskett]

On Sunday 30 December 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> > The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java compatable
> >  but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an
> > incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name
> > and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java
> > program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and
> > shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm
> > surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name.
>
> That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't
> consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used
> the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort.
> IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in
> Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to
> remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes
> completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.
>
> Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which
> until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and
> paved the way to better compatibility.
>
> http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-jav
> a/
>
> Rahul 
Excellent news, Rahul.  Unforch not in time for F8, F9 maybe?

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
There can be no twisted thought without a twisted molecule.
		-- R. W. Gerard

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 30, 2007 12:00 PM, Kam Leo <kam.leo(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Dec 30, 2007 7:25 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
>  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  > Hash: SHA1
>  >
>  > Kam Leo wrote:
>  >
>  > > Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time.
>  >
>  >
>  > Perhaps I said that incorrectly.
>  >
>  > "I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
>  > installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
>  > Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
>  > because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
>  > the ISS from Windows 2000.
>  >
>  > ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
>  > included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
>  > not work with XP Home.
>
>  What is normally done? Apache, Samba and a whole host of other
>  applications are not installed and/or enabled by default, either.
>
>  >   David
>
>  How did XP Home get into this conversation?
>  
Sorry, I hit the send key by accident. I was going to add that XP Home
is a stripped down OS so why drag it into the discussion?

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Craig White wrote:

>  the full license is linked on that very page I linked above so you
> could
>  read it if you cared to. 

Sorry. Busy day. I did not see that link. Thanks. I'll make a note of it
and look later this afternoon.


- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2qDYACgkQAO0wNI1X4QGanACdG0ZIppd9Om3hwL9LgaFSaSWS
> wOMAoOKBum68r9j4ih6+watpRRcKN7tD
> =11XO
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Rahul Sundaram]

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  The bigger problem is distributing something that is not java
> compatable 
>   but executing it with the java name.  Microsoft tried to promote an 
>  incompatible program that similarly fit their agenda with the java name 
>  and Sun successfully sued them over it.  The fedora-shipped not-java 
>  program that executes with the java name does just as much damage and 
>  shouldn't be named java until it passes the compatibility tests.  I'm 
>  surprised fedora's legal dept. allowed this abuse of a trademarked name. 
That's because trademark does not apply to filenames. Sun doesn't 
consider classpath or GCJ as damage to Java in any way and has even used 
the same license classpath originally had for their new openjdk effort. 
IcedTea is a free and open source derivative of OpenJDK and included in 
Fedora 8 by default and Sun has continued to use that as a prototype to 
remove the binary encumbrances in their code. Once OpenJDK becomes 
completely open source, Fedora will include that by default.

Besides a compatible version of Java requires signing a test suite which 
until recently came with onerous restrictions that has been lifted and 
paved the way to better compatibility.

http://www.press.redhat.com/2007/11/05/red-hat-helps-advance-open-source-...

Rahul

[Les Mikesell]

David Boles wrote:

> > I thought there was a compatibility test.  Does everything being
> > distributed and executed with the java name pass?
> >
>  
>  
>  You did not answer the main question. What Java package provide by
>  Fedora does not work with the Java provide by Fedora? 
I'm not interested in any of the distro programs - I want OpenNMS and 
Alfresco to work.

And you didn't answer my question either.  Does the thing fedora 
executes under the name "java" pass the compatibility tests?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
>  ----
>  just for the record, I remember getting an 'extra' CD with the store
>  bought RHL 7.1 that contained Java and I believe Acrobat Reader rpm's so
>  the notion that this is something that started with RHEL 4/5 simply
>  doesn't wash. 
The addition of the Sun java rpm to the updates repository is what is 
different.  The old 'extra' CD had commercial demos without ongoing support.

>  As for the notion that the system stabilizes prior to a new RHEL
>  release, that's entirely anecdotal. 
OK, there are only three data points and even though all three show the 
same thing you can still say it isn't enough to prove the case...

>  There's no question that Red Hat
>  personnel are involved in the development of both and it's likely that
>  when approaching the cycle release points of RHEL, less efforts are made
>  on edge releases but that would likely vary depending upon whether it
>  was core items or software that wasn't likely to provide libraries that
>  other software needs. 
I've forgotten the exact details, but I think there was a discussion on 
the CentOS list about some things that were the same binaries as fedora 
being included in RHEL5 without a recompile and causing some trouble 
when they did their rebuild-from-source.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:

>  Yes. The "buy me" includes a manual and some level of
> support. (Red
>  Hat drop such offerings and switched to Fedora.) Novell, offers
>  enterprise versions under the SUSE brand: http://www.novell.com/linux/
>  
>  
>  Why not? IIS has been available for Windows 2000/XP Pro for a long time. 

Perhaps I said that incorrectly.

"I would not expect a Windows XP Home/PRO computer to be a server
installation for example." because it is not normally done that way.
Installing ISS on Windows XP Home can be done but it not supported
because ISS is not included on the XP Home install disk. You have to use
the ISS from Windows 2000.

ISS can be added after a normal install of Windows XP PRO and is
included on the XP PRO install disk. The ISS from Windows XP Pro will
not work with XP Home.

- --


  David

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd3uGQACgkQAO0wNI1X4QE2qQCfb9rcpRy2xAoYtE37Oinx5XW/
> TUMAn3yeaqJgMx/L1Ny+q9vjHmSpEHo2
> =hfPG
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 23:38 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  > ----
>  >> Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL.
>  > ----
>  > I'd be interested to see what evidence you offer for this besides just a
>  > gut feeling. I've seen similar comments but they seem to be spouted by
>  > people who simply don't know anything empirically. I haven't seen that
>  > comment made by anyone from Red Hat but perhaps you have and can point
>  > out a link to me.
>  
>  Go through the fedora mail list archives and note how the system 
>  stabilizes and complaints stop a few months before a new RHEL release. 
>  Then compare the program versions in the RHEL release to what fedora 
>  users were running.  You'll find a couple of surprises out of the 
>  thousands of packages.  RHEL4 including mysql5 would be a notable 
>  difference to the FC3 contemporary; adding the Sun jdk to RHEL4/5 
>  updates after the release would be another.  And look at the problems 
>  mentioned on the mail list as major changes begin again in the following 
>  fedora version. 
----
just for the record, I remember getting an 'extra' CD with the store
bought RHL 7.1 that contained Java and I believe Acrobat Reader rpm's so
the notion that this is something that started with RHEL 4/5 simply
doesn't wash.

As for the notion that the system stabilizes prior to a new RHEL
release, that's entirely anecdotal. There's no question that Red Hat
personnel are involved in the development of both and it's likely that
when approaching the cycle release points of RHEL, less efforts are made
on edge releases but that would likely vary depending upon whether it
was core items or software that wasn't likely to provide libraries that
other software needs.

Craig

[Ed Greshko]

Karl Larsen wrote:
> >>     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got
> >> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with
> >> this      
You mean you could find....

http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/index.html



-- 
The two most beautiful words in the English language are "Cheque Enclosed."
		-- Dorothy Parker

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 12:14 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  > On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 10:21 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>  >   
>  >> Karl Larsen wrote:
>  >>     
>  >>>>>     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got
>  >>>>> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do
> with
>  >>>>> this     
>  >>>>>           
>  >> You mean you could find....
>  >>
>  >> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/index.html
>  >>
>  >>     
>  > ----
>  > He was following Knute Johnsons' installation notes...
>  >
>  > http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
>  >
>  > which leaves that out
>  >
>  >   
>  Hummm....  Step 1 of that link simply says....
>  
>  Download the Sun Java Linux RPM from java.sun.com and install it.
>  
>  Just seems sensible that if you don't know what "install it" means and
>  can't figure it out for yourself that you'd look for help from the place
>  you downloaded.  But, that's just me....  :-) 
----
me too...but I've done it enough, I could do it in my sleep  ;-)

I sort of have a thing about mini walk-throughs that are incomplete and
often create more confusion than they prevent.

Craig

[Knute Johnson]

> Knute Johnson wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:04 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
> >>     
> >>>>> Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on
> both 32 
> >>>>> and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
> >>>>> plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with
> the 
> >>>>> 32bit version.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> >>>>>           
> >>>> ----
> >>>> I agree with the following notations...
> >>>>
> >>>> you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
> >>>> the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
> >>>> jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages
> such
> >>>> as the compaat-libstdc++-33
> >>>>         
> >>> I works if you do it after, I never tried before.
> >>>
> >>>       
> >>>> Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
> >>>> JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
> >>>> for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
> >>>> course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a
> users
> >>>> $PATH.
> >>>>         
> >>> If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
> >>> the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation.
> >>>       
> >> ----
> >> docbook-XSL for xalan/xerces/fop etc. Otherwise, you have to locate them
> >> with each call.
> >>
> >> Probably others too...
> >>     
> >
> > Sorry, I have no idea what that means.
> >
> >   
>     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got 
> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with this 
If you are talking about my web page then you treat the JRE just like 
the JDK.  Run the file and it will exand and install the RPMs.

-- 
Knute Johnson
Molon Labe...

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 29, 2007 7:24 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
>
>  Novell Corporation is the principle sponsor of openSUSE. openSUSE has
>  an enterprise version with full support. 

Yeah. I think that I remember now. They have a 'free' and a 'buy me'
edition right?


>  Says whom? Fedora is a test bed for Red Hat RHEL. Samba, apache,
> Open
>  Office, Gnome, and KDE are just applications running on top of the
>  latest version of the Linux OS. Which packages you install determines
>  whether your machine is a server, a desktop, or a hybrid. 

i will let the "Fedora  people' respond to that. I am sure that you will
disagree with what they have to say here.


>  Please tell me how the kernel, Apache, and Samba packages in the
> other
>  server distributions are any better than the ones provided with
>  Fedora. 

Only that 'distributions' such as RHEL, or CentOS, or others like them
*are* server oriented. Fedora 8, for example, is obviously a desktop
type distribution. You did notice that apache is not on the DVD did you not?

I did not say that packages were different or better. but if I was going
to setup a server I would *use* a server installation. Linux, or
Microsoft, or Mac.

I would not expect Windows XP Home/pro to be a server installation for
example. I would expect RHEL to be a server. Understand?
- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEUEARECAAYFAkd3IU0ACgkQAO0wNI1X4QHUDACfYxys2Nomx0QDFMlR5Ou8pM2D
> LQUAmMZmzvXjWYqs/sT4l9D78L5KzG0=
> =Q4zM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Craig White wrote:
>  On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 21:07 -0500, David Boles wrote:
>  ----
>  I dunno...sometimes you get less (not Les) 

Hmm... I had not thought of it that way.  ;-)

Reminds me of AZ. (OT here - sorta')

http://gocalifornia.about.com/bl_aztombphoto_lesm.htm

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd3EA0ACgkQAO0wNI1X4QHE4gCcCGDUtEkAEwSibJ7QXsYvVnO4
> Y3YAoN/fYAIqqn5k27JQrcrH8hwO/AVK
> =a+io
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Karl Larsen]

Knute Johnson wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:04 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
> >     
> >>>> Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on both 32
>
> >>>> and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
> >>>> plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with the
>
> >>>> 32bit version.
> >>>>
> >>>> I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> >>>>           
> >>> ----
> >>> I agree with the following notations...
> >>>
> >>> you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
> >>> the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
> >>> jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages such
> >>> as the compaat-libstdc++-33
> >>>         
> >> I works if you do it after, I never tried before.
> >>
> >>       
> >>> Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
> >>> JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
> >>> for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
> >>> course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a
> users
> >>> $PATH.
> >>>         
> >> If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
> >> the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation.
> >>       
> > ----
> > docbook-XSL for xalan/xerces/fop etc. Otherwise, you have to locate them
> > with each call.
> >
> > Probably others too...
> >     
>
>  Sorry, I have no idea what that means.
>
>     
    The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got 
jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with this

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 29, 2007 2:48 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
>  
>  Neither openSuSE nor Fedora are end-all products. Both distributions
>  make decent servers. However, neither is ready to replace Microsoft's
>  Windows OS and the applications for that OS. Some day perhaps; just
>  not today. 

I am not familiar openSuSE. But I thought that, from what I have read,
that openSuSE was a desktop oriented type distribution.

>  Fedora is fast paced and has fewer restraints on me with configuring
> a
>  system. I learn many things because of that pace.
>  
>  Why do I have to exclusively run one variant of Linux? I have multiple
>  machines which are multi-booted. 

An again Fedora is a desktop oriented distribution.

I see no problem, your choice of course, how many distributions you wish
to run. I would not think, if it was me, that I would run a desktop
distribution as a true server.

May I ask why you do that? When there are several, many, good server
oriented distributions, run desktop oriented distributions as servers?

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd3D1MACgkQAO0wNI1X4QHibgCg9/Feht+9wA72qs/h2dzbitY/
> dHEAoIVRNHzkaUjaoRGUd+RdJ5hrpPDd
> =TgoZ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 2:48 PM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  >> Hash: SHA1
>  >>
>  >> Karl Larsen wrote:
>  >>> Craig White wrote:
>  >>>    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?
>  >>
>  >> I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  >> includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  >> Nvidia drivers that you install?
>  >>
>  >
>  > Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3.
>
>
>  That was a fair question from me becasue i don't really know the answer.
>
>  Here is some questions for you.
>
>  Does "openSUSE 10.3" do what you want and need from Linux that Fedora
>  does not? Or will not? Really? 
Neither openSuSE nor Fedora are end-all products. Both distributions
make decent servers. However, neither is ready to replace Microsoft's
Windows OS and the applications for that OS. Some day perhaps; just
not today.

>  So why are you still running Fedora? I would have switched in a
> heartbeat. 
Fedora is fast paced and has fewer restraints on me with configuring a
system. I learn many things because of that pace.

Why do I have to exclusively run one variant of Linux? I have multiple
machines which are multi-booted.

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 21:07 -0500, David Boles wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  Les Mikesell wrote:
>  
>  > 
>  > 
>  > I don't see this as conceptually much different than getting something
>  > claiming to be java that isn't with fedora but the real thing with paid
>  > RHEL/support.
>  > 
>  
>  
>  Which really says it all Les. When you pay for RHEL and get all of these
>  expected goodies and support and you sell your services using that paid
>  for support you feel goo.
>  
>  When you d/l free Fedora and don't get all of these goodies and you sell
>  your services...
>  
>  You get what you pay for always. 
----
I dunno...sometimes you get less (not Les)

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sun, 2007-12-30 at 10:21 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>  >>>     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got
>  >>> jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with
>  >>> this     
>  
>  You mean you could find....
>  
>  http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/install/index.html
>   
----
He was following Knute Johnsons' installation notes...

http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html

which leaves that out

Craig

[Karl Larsen]

Craig White wrote:
>  On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 18:00 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote:
>
>    
> >     The web page doesn't cover the problem if you got 
> > jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin which is a bash file. What do you do with this
> >     
>  ----
>  mv jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin /tmp
>  su -
>  cd /tmp
>  chmod u+x jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin
>  ./jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin
>
>  but I thought you already had it installed
>
>  Craig
>
>     
Not on F8.

Karl


-- 

	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
   PGP 4208 4D6E 595F 22B9 FF1C  ECB6 4A3C 2C54 FE23 53A7

[Alan Cox]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:08:48 -0600
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Alan Cox wrote:
>  >> I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the reference 
>  >> version of java. 
>  > 
>  > It follows the Linux Standards Base and thus the FHS standard for where
>  > files go.
>  
>  Does the FHS dictate symlinks pointing to symlinks and executables under 
>  /usr/lib? 
The FHS specifies that program binaries go in certain places and
libraries in other defined places. There are several options depending
upon what the software is, who installs it and who the intended user
is: /usr/java is not one of them. The only real package specific /usr
directory allowed is /usr/X11 - for historical reasons and being
deprecated over time as software stops assuming that path.

[Knute Johnson]

> On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:04 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
> > >> Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on both 32 
> > >> and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
> > >> plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with the 
> > >> 32bit version.
> > >> 
> > >> I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
> > >> 
> > >> http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> > >----
> > >I agree with the following notations...
> > >
> > >you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
> > >the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
> > >jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages such
> > >as the compaat-libstdc++-33
> > 
> > I works if you do it after, I never tried before.
> > 
> > >Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
> > >JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
> > >for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
> > >course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a users
> > >$PATH.
> > 
> > If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
> > the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation.
> ----
> docbook-XSL for xalan/xerces/fop etc. Otherwise, you have to locate them
> with each call.
>
> Probably others too... 
Sorry, I have no idea what that means.

-- 
Knute Johnson
Molon Labe...

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:
> >> Actually for Red Hat it is because Java was non-free. There
> are various
> >> third party products bundled alongside RHEL which businesses demand which
> >> are non-free.
> > And what could possibly make them think that fedora users don't need the 
> > same?
>  
>  Fedora is a distribution of free software. Now that Java is becoming free
>  Fedora will be able to include it. If you want a non-free Java for Fedora
>  then Sun will supply you with one.
>  
> >>> the baroque locations that java is expected to live on RH/fedora to the 
> >>> place that the official distribution puts it if it makes you happy.
> >> The Sun package is produced by Sun, they choosoe to put it in /usr/java.
> > Sun probably knows as much as anyone else about where java should live, 
> > but if you want to second guess that and build a morass of symlinks 
> > pointing to symlinks, why not include a set that point to this location?
>  
>  You'd have to ask Sun why they did it the way they did. 
I'm asking why fedora chooses not to be compatible with the reference 
version of java.  And why it ships something that executes with the name 
java that probably doesn't pass the compatibility tests.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
> >
> > And you didn't answer my question either.  Does the thing fedora 
> > executes under the name "java" pass the compatibility tests?
>  ----
>  Isn't that a straw man argument? If gcj version executes all of the java
>  needs of the packages that Fedora offers, isn't that enough? 
No, it damages the credibility of java for everyone if a java runtime 
won't execute a java package correctly, yet is still executed as "java".

>  I haven't run OpenNMS but I note their recommendation for 1.5.x
> which is
>  starting to age now.  
It has had updates fairly recently. I don't think it is worn out or broken.

>  I have Alfresco running and I don't know that it
>  does/doesn't work with gcj version because I just simply installed the
>  Sun version but Tomcat works with the gcj version so it wouldn't be too
>  much of a stretch to think that it would work with Alfresco too. 
Do you have time to find out?  I don't know what is missing in gcj. 
OpenNMS used to need a working jni interface to be able to build icmp 
packets and to link to rrd libraries if you use them (there is now a 
pure java jrobin replacement).

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  David Boles wrote:
>
>
>  I'm not interested in any of the distro programs - I want OpenNMS and
>  Alfresco to work.
>
>  And you didn't answer my question either.  Does the thing fedora
>  executes under the name "java" pass the compatibility tests? 

It does for me and everything that Fedora provides to me. *If* I go
outside Fedora applications I would not necessarily expect them to work.
Actually I would be pleasantly surprise if they did work.

But I would also be smart enough to figure out why there was a problem,
what it is, and fix it. How about you? Can you uninstall IcedTea and
install Sun's Java? I can.

And I don't do this computer stuff for my living. Linux is a hobby for
me. I get paid to supervise building construction. And when I do 'work
stuff' it is in Windows XP Pro. And I know how to deal with that too.

Am I a hero? of course not. I deal with situations and find solutions.
And I never complain. Well seldom omplain. Only if the beer is warm and
the meal is cold.  ;-)
- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd24a0ACgkQAO0wNI1X4QEBRQCffKagDmtkToAIp6Re/8GwkA8g
> uysAniVOYJyf8n+VVxah7nbuFVtqKvT+
> =8Lmz
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 17:24 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  David Boles wrote:
>  
>  >> I thought there was a compatibility test.  Does everything being
>  >> distributed and executed with the java name pass?
>  >>
>  > 
>  > 
>  > You did not answer the main question. What Java package provide by
>  > Fedora does not work with the Java provide by Fedora?
>  
>  I'm not interested in any of the distro programs - I want OpenNMS and 
>  Alfresco to work.
>  
>  And you didn't answer my question either.  Does the thing fedora 
>  executes under the name "java" pass the compatibility tests? 
----
Isn't that a straw man argument? If gcj version executes all of the java
needs of the packages that Fedora offers, isn't that enough?

I haven't run OpenNMS but I note their recommendation for 1.5.x which is
starting to age now. I have Alfresco running and I don't know that it
does/doesn't work with gcj version because I just simply installed the
Sun version but Tomcat works with the gcj version so it wouldn't be too
much of a stretch to think that it would work with Alfresco too.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Alan Cox wrote:

> >>> Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll
> get something that
> >>> is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs.
> >> So use something else. You do know how to add and remove rpm packages
> >> right?  ;-)
> >>
> >> Ah come on Les. You know why they don't include Sun's Java. For pretty
> >> much the same reason they don't include your beloved codecs. Non FOSS.
> > Errr, no, this time is it because they want you to buy RHEL with support 
>  
>  Actually for Red Hat it is because Java was non-free. There are various
>  third party products bundled alongside RHEL which businesses demand which
>  are non-free. 
And what could possibly make them think that fedora users don't need the 
same?

> > the baroque locations that java is expected to live on RH/fedora
> to the 
> > place that the official distribution puts it if it makes you happy.
>  
>  The Sun package is produced by Sun, they choosoe to put it in /usr/java. 
Sun probably knows as much as anyone else about where java should live, 
but if you want to second guess that and build a morass of symlinks 
pointing to symlinks, why not include a set that point to this location?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 15:04 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
>  >> Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and
> configure on both 32 
>  >> and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
>  >> plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with the 
>  >> 32bit version.
>  >> 
>  >> I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
>  >> 
>  >> http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
>  >----
>  >I agree with the following notations...
>  >
>  >you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
>  >the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
>  >jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages such
>  >as the compaat-libstdc++-33
>  
>  I works if you do it after, I never tried before.
>  
>  >Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
>  >JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
>  >for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
>  >course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a users
>  >$PATH.
>  
>  If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
>  the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation. 
----
docbook-XSL for xalan/xerces/fop etc. Otherwise, you have to locate them
with each call.

Probably others too...

Craig

[Knute Johnson]

> > Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on
> both 32 
> > and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
> > plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with the 
> > 32bit version.
> > 
> > I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
> > 
> > http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> ----
> I agree with the following notations...
>
> you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
> the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
> jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages such
> as the compaat-libstdc++-33 
I works if you do it after, I never tried before.

> Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
> JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
> for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
> course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a users
> $PATH. 
If you use the JPackage none of that is required.  In fact setting 
the CLASSPATH is almost never required in any installation.

-- 
Knute Johnson
Molon Labe...

[Alan Cox]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 15:55:50 -0600
Les Mikesell <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  David Boles wrote:
>  
>  >> Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll get something that
>  >> is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs.
>  > 
>  > So use something else. You do know how to add and remove rpm packages
>  > right?  ;-)
>  > 
>  > Ah come on Les. You know why they don't include Sun's Java. For pretty
>  > much the same reason they don't include your beloved codecs. Non FOSS.
>  
>  Errr, no, this time is it because they want you to buy RHEL with support  
Actually for Red Hat it is because Java was non-free. There are various
third party products bundled alongside RHEL which businesses demand which
are non-free.

>  the baroque locations that java is expected to live on RH/fedora to
> the 
>  place that the official distribution puts it if it makes you happy. 
The Sun package is produced by Sun, they choosoe to put it in /usr/java.

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Karl Larsen wrote:
> >> Craig White wrote:
> >>    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?
> >
> > I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
> > includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
> > Nvidia drivers that you install?
> >
>  
>  Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3. 

That was a fair question from me becasue i don't really know the answer.

Here is some questions for you.

Does "openSUSE 10.3" do what you want and need from Linux that Fedora
does not? Or will not? Really?

So why are you still running Fedora? I would have switched in a heartbeat.

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2ztsACgkQAO0wNI1X4QF0UwCg+nFNZW6XyxoIwijyPS205MkQ
> R7AAn1BzfuacjdqqK09o20r5SEJZYF3D
> =a3Tv
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Les Mikesell wrote:
>  David Boles wrote:
>  
> >> Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll get something that
> >> is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs.
> >
> > So use something else. You do know how to add and remove rpm packages
> > right?  ;-)
> >
> > Ah come on Les. You know why they don't include Sun's Java. For pretty
> > much the same reason they don't include your beloved codecs. Non FOSS.
>  
>  Errr, no, this time is it because they want you to buy RHEL with support
>  and access to: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0963.html.  But
>  you can pretend that it would be illegal to even supply symlinks from
>  the baroque locations that java is expected to live on RH/fedora to the
>  place that the official distribution puts it if it makes you happy.
>  
> > And what specific Fedora provided java application does not work?
>  
>  Java works or it doesn't.  It doesn't care about a subset of packages.
>  
> > And I will say this. The Icedtea has improved a lot. But as long as
> > people *immediately* bailout things are not going to improve. Did you
> > report (bugzilla) this tragic event you had? If you did not just how do
> > you expect anyone to fix it?
>  
>  I thought there was a compatibility test.  Does everything being
>  distributed and executed with the java name pass?
>   

You did not answer the main question. What Java package provide by
Fedora does not work with the Java provide by Fedora?

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2zcsACgkQAO0wNI1X4QGb2wCfTI5dtG9J6JUI7IYcSnTOXxq9
> CqIAn3Jm1blQHpIobEItcpLlT1fCmK+B
> =8+/1
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Les Mikesell]

David Boles wrote:

> > Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll get
> something that
> > is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs.
>  
>  So use something else. You do know how to add and remove rpm packages
>  right?  ;-)
>  
>  Ah come on Les. You know why they don't include Sun's Java. For pretty
>  much the same reason they don't include your beloved codecs. Non FOSS. 
Errr, no, this time is it because they want you to buy RHEL with support 
and access to: http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2007-0963.html.  But 
you can pretend that it would be illegal to even supply symlinks from 
the baroque locations that java is expected to live on RH/fedora to the 
place that the official distribution puts it if it makes you happy.

>  And what specific Fedora provided java application does not work?
Java works or it doesn't.  It doesn't care about a subset of packages.

>  And I will say this. The Icedtea has improved a lot. But as long as
>  people *immediately* bailout things are not going to improve. Did you
>  report (bugzilla) this tragic event you had? If you did not just how do
>  you expect anyone to fix it? 
I thought there was a compatibility test.  Does everything being 
distributed and executed with the java name pass?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:

>  ----
>  openNMS isn't packaged or distributed with Fedora is it? 
No, I'm not interested in being restricted to the subset of programs 
that are included in a distribution.  Are you?

>  ----
> >> 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's more than luck.  It's a miracle if that happened after just 
installing Sun's RPM.

>  ----
> >  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
>  ---- 
Ummm, somehow I'd expect a package named 
java-1.5.0-sun-1.5.0.13-1jpp.1.el5.i586.rpm to have the jpackage style 
additions that RH makes necessary instead of being the stock Sun rpm.

>  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. 
It's not completely impossible to make it work but not trivial and I 
think you have to admit that you aren't an average user.

>  ----
> > 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. 
Yes, that's a generic complaint that the packagers don't give a crap if 
anyone else's stuff works or about cooperating with anyone else.  Your 
comment seems to imply that should be assumed and accepted.

>  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. 
No, but historically if something is broken in fedora, it will be 
equally broken for the next 7 years when the RH cut happens.  They fixed 
the brokenness after the fact in RHEL5 with the package I pointed out, 
but CentOS doesn't carry it and fedora users don't get it.


>  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. 
You can install it separately if you want, but their yum repository 
includes the jdk.  Click/install the appropriate yum config from
http://yum.opennms.org/ (you'll want the 'unstable' version). Then 'yum 
install opennms' to get everything and you are up to the 'Configure 
OpenNMS' heading on http://www.opennms.org/index.php/Installation:Yum.

A few minutes compared to several weeks of looking for jpackage'd SUN 
instructions before that - Oh, and the CentOS5 tomcat didn't work with 
the Sun JDK until an update a few months after release because the jars 
were built with the broken included java - apparently RH fixed theirs 
somewhat earlier but Centos didn't catch it.  This version doesn't need 
tomcat but the earlier ones did.

>  By the way, I've been using Zenoss which appears to be similar
> to
>  OpenNMS...have you any comparison to offer? 
Haven't used Zenoss, but OpenNMS compares favorably to anything I've 
ever seen in terms of autodiscovery and assuming that you have enough 
machines that you don't want to see them all on the screen at once. It 
auto-discovers services and notifies you when they stop, and graphs 
interface/cpu/memory/disk SNMP values with sensible defaults. 
Considering the huge framework underneath it, I'm impressed by the 
current rapid development without breaking anything.  As an example of 
what it can do, if you enable link discovery and have snmp on your 
switches it will show what devices are connected to each switch port. 
It can do maps, but that's not a real strong point.  It's better at 
consolidating the problems on a viewable screen and doing notifications 
on errors and thresholds.  It's weak link is that some of the 
configuration still has to be done by editing xml files although each 
revision moves more control into the web interface.  I'm also impressed 
by the ability to grab the svn source and rebuild a trunk snapshot with 
the build script pulling in all of the components you need.

>  ----
> > 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 
64 bit java and flash (both are supposed to work in Solaris), and 
probably others.

>  ----
> > 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. 
So which one is perfect? There's nothing particularly mac-specific in 
the problems of connecting inbound through NAT routers. At least Apple 
doesn't just say 'you can't have it because its license isn't 
restrictive enough to be called free'.  And they don't go out of their 
way to make their system difficult to use with 3rd party programs - 
mostly, anyway.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Rahul Sundaram]

Kam Leo wrote:
>  On Dec 29, 2007 1:07 PM, Rahul Sundaram
> <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
> > Kam Leo wrote:
> >> On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >>> I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
> >>> includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
> >>> Nvidia drivers that you install?
> >>>
> >> Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3.
> > Do you actually include proprietary kernel modules in their official
> > repository? I don't think so.
> >
> > Rahul
>  
>  I was referring to java. 
I doubt they include Sun Java in their main repository either. It is 
likely they include a repository source.

Rahul

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 1:07 PM, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  Kam Leo wrote:
>  > On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>
>  >> I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  >> includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  >> Nvidia drivers that you install?
>  >>
>  >
>  > Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3.
>
>  Do you actually include proprietary kernel modules in their official
>  repository? I don't think so.
>
>  Rahul 
I was referring to java.

[Kam Leo]

On Dec 29, 2007 6:20 AM, David Boles <dgboles(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>  > Craig White wrote:
>  >    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?
>
>
>  I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  Nvidia drivers that you install?
>  
Expand your limited horizon. Try openSUSE 10.3.

>    David

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Les Mikesell wrote:

>  Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll get something
> that
>  is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs. 
So use something else. You do know how to add and remove rpm packages
right?  ;-)

Ah come on Les. You know why they don't include Sun's Java. For pretty
much the same reason they don't include your beloved codecs. Non FOSS.
And what specific Fedora provided java application does not work?

And I will say this. The Icedtea has improved a lot. But as long as
people *immediately* bailout things are not going to improve. Did you
report (bugzilla) this tragic event you had? If you did not just how do
you expect anyone to fix it?

- --


  David

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2rHkACgkQAO0wNI1X4QGxSgCgrACDRUVvYMRe4f39UPWI1zXL
> kbcAn2kkyJ74qSD9lNuQOQzbO4fYojiq
> =Itt9
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Craig White wrote:
>  On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 13:01 -0500, David Boles wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  
> >>    I do not know. Unbuto has Nvidia drivers that worked on my computer.
> >> But it was not perfect. I expect Windows which doesn't change kernels 5
> >> times a year, could have the driver within but not sure it does.
> >
> > Microsoft supplies a generic Nvidia driver that works with all Nvidia
> > cards. Similar to the one provided in the Linux kernel. If you actually
> > buy the card, in a box, drivers are supplied on a CD. But not current
> > one. Just as with Linux if you want the newest, 3D drivers you have to
> > go to Nvidia, find the correct ones, and install them.
> >
> > The difference is that if you have already installed better drivers you
> > have to uninstall them, reboot to the Microsoft provided one, install
> > the new one and reboot to the newer ones. Then configure them.
> >
> > Microsoft does not provide Java on their disk. Actually they provide the
> > operating system only. It does have some built in features but nothing
> > really great. You get a real deal with the Linux OS/software when you
> > install.  ;-)
>  ----
>  Most people aren't assembling their own systems but are buying a branded
>  installation which already has the enhanced video drivers and often Java
>  pre-installed and thus most Windows users haven't a clue which is
>  provided by Microsoft and which is provided by the branded system.
>  That's just the way it is. 

Oh for sure. And those are the same people that show up on the Linux
lists, this one included, asking "why 'X-feature/hardware' does not work
anymore after I installed Linux (pick name here)" without doing any
research before doing that installation.

And I would be willing to bet that most, not all but most, try Linux for
the free software because they are cheap or can't figure out how to
steal software that runs on Windows.

Sound bitter don't I?  ;-)
- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2p+MACgkQAO0wNI1X4QETZgCgrwunOz06OLsG7615sS/bcX6L
> O9EAoIGJRuaozO/f62kjVYqCOJ5TyzXe
> =C+Pw
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 13:34 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  David Boles wrote:
>  > 
>  > Microsoft does not provide Java on their disk. Actually they provide the
>  > operating system only. It does have some built in features but nothing
>  > really great. You get a real deal with the Linux OS/software when you
>  > install.  ;-)
>  
>  Real _what_?  If you execute java in fedora, you'll get something that 
>  is not java and won't successfully execute many java programs. 
----
Which Fedora packaged programs don't execute with the provided gcj java?

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 13:01 -0500, David Boles wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 
>  >    I do not know. Unbuto has Nvidia drivers that worked on my
> computer.
>  > But it was not perfect. I expect Windows which doesn't change kernels 5
>  > times a year, could have the driver within but not sure it does.
>  
>  
>  Microsoft supplies a generic Nvidia driver that works with all Nvidia
>  cards. Similar to the one provided in the Linux kernel. If you actually
>  buy the card, in a box, drivers are supplied on a CD. But not current
>  one. Just as with Linux if you want the newest, 3D drivers you have to
>  go to Nvidia, find the correct ones, and install them.
>  
>  The difference is that if you have already installed better drivers you
>  have to uninstall them, reboot to the Microsoft provided one, install
>  the new one and reboot to the newer ones. Then configure them.
>  
>  Microsoft does not provide Java on their disk. Actually they provide the
>  operating system only. It does have some built in features but nothing
>  really great. You get a real deal with the Linux OS/software when you
>  install.  ;-) 
----
Most people aren't assembling their own systems but are buying a branded
installation which already has the enhanced video drivers and often Java
pre-installed and thus most Windows users haven't a clue which is
provided by Microsoft and which is provided by the branded system.
That's just the way it is.

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 13:07 -0500, David Boles wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  Craig White wrote:
>  > ----
>  > WRT Sun's Java, you know that Karl won't know that answer but I do.
>  > 
>  > The answer is here...
>  > https://jdk-distros.dev.java.net/
>  > 
>  > which of course still begs the issue of their license which is
>  > restrictive.
>  
>  
>  They provide the whole package or just the 'free' part? It has been a
>  long time since I read Sun's Java license but I seem to remember that
>  you could not do that. 
----
the full license is linked on that very page I linked above so you could
read it if you cared to.

Craig

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Craig White wrote:
>  ----
>  WRT Sun's Java, you know that Karl won't know that answer but I do.
>  
>  The answer is here...
>  https://jdk-distros.dev.java.net/
>  
>  which of course still begs the issue of their license which is
>  restrictive. 

They provide the whole package or just the 'free' part? It has been a
long time since I read Sun's Java license but I seem to remember that
you could not do that.


>  nVidia is of course, a horse of another color since only binaries
> exist
>  and there is no source to study at all. 

Which was pretty much my point there. Good (bad?) way to stick something
evil into your distribution.  ;-) And it does not have to be evil. Maybe
it just does not work well. Or at all. So how do you fix it? You can't.

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2jNIACgkQAO0wNI1X4QFiOwCgoiulxTp4060sUZsBJetfD6La
> iMIAn2Ndf1b8/7rmL3oQQcOemZQikAhm
> =RbLC
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  David Boles wrote:
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>   
> >>> Craig White wrote:
> >>>    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?
> >>>     
>  
>  
>  I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  Nvidia drivers that you install?
>  
>  
> > 
>     I do not know. Unbuto has Nvidia drivers that worked on my
> computer.
>  But it was not perfect. I expect Windows which doesn't change kernels 5
>  times a year, could have the driver within but not sure it does. 

Microsoft supplies a generic Nvidia driver that works with all Nvidia
cards. Similar to the one provided in the Linux kernel. If you actually
buy the card, in a box, drivers are supplied on a CD. But not current
one. Just as with Linux if you want the newest, 3D drivers you have to
go to Nvidia, find the correct ones, and install them.

The difference is that if you have already installed better drivers you
have to uninstall them, reboot to the Microsoft provided one, install
the new one and reboot to the newer ones. Then configure them.

Microsoft does not provide Java on their disk. Actually they provide the
operating system only. It does have some built in features but nothing
really great. You get a real deal with the Linux OS/software when you
install.  ;-)

- --


  David
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2i30ACgkQAO0wNI1X4QFWBgCgwpOtaWGMlqfSfl2oq5pUcUKv
> WakAnA/0DSGPbYRpuyN1vpJRVd+27OEp
> =dIQc
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 23:32 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote: 
>  >> 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?
>  
>  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.
----
>  >> 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.
>  
>  Sun's java works, but if you install it and type java, something else 
>  will run.  That's fedora's fault. 
----
not if you run
alternatives --config java # and set it to Sun's installation

not if you set the proper environment variables such as
CLASSPATH/JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME or simply put the java binary in your $PATH

Too bad that Sun's instructions for doing these things are vague or
non-existent.
----
>  > 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.
>  
>  Does anything work on Windows?  I meant Solaris as the comparison. 
----
Ah...well since Sun controls both Solaris and their Java, it would be
amusing if they didn't work together. 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.

Craig

[Craig White]

On Sat, 2007-12-29 at 09:20 -0500, David Boles wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  Karl Larsen wrote:
>  > Craig White wrote:
>  >    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?
>  
>  
>  I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
>  includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
>  Nvidia drivers that you install? 
----
WRT Sun's Java, you know that Karl won't know that answer but I do.

The answer is here...
https://jdk-distros.dev.java.net/

which of course still begs the issue of their license which is
restrictive.

nVidia is of course, a horse of another color since only binaries exist
and there is no source to study at all.

Craig

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 21:40 -0800, Knute Johnson wrote:
>  >Fedora is a community project - if people want to pitch in to
> integrate
>  >Sun's Java more easily, great, I'm all for it.
>  >
>  >As it is distributed, the license is still restrictive and none of the
>  >repositories will touch the packaging which means that you have to get
>  >the software from Sun and rely upon their assistance (which is minimal)
>  >to install / integrate.
>  >
>  >In the meantime, Red Hat and Fedora are distributing a free version that
>  >mostly works, on all platforms, without restrictive licensing, thereby
>  >providing a working Tomcat, Eclipse, etc. I guess I fail to see what the
>  >complaint is.
>  >
>  >I don't recall ever seeing you post on something that you couldn't get
>  >done with the GCJ version so I suspect that you are just downloading and
>  >playing with the Sun version of Java because you think you need to do
>  >that.
>  >
>  >To the OP, I think I gave you a reasonable method to install either
>  >Sun's JDK or JRE and to create the environmental variables so that each
>  >user has full access to the Sun version.
>  >
>  >Craig
>  
>  Actually, Sun's Java is very easy to install and configure on both 32 
>  and 64 bit.  The only real problem is the lack of a 64bit browser 
>  plugin and as far as I can tell nspluginwrapper doesn't work with the 
>  32bit version.
>  
>  I did a short page on how to set up Sun's Java on F8;
>  
>  http://www.knutejohnson.com/sun-java-on-F8.html 
----
I agree with the following notations...

you should probably install the compat-libstdc++-33 PRIOR to installing
the Sun JRE/JDK shouldn't you? If you do a 'yum localinstall
jre/jdk-VERSION' it will automatically install requisite packages such
as the compaat-libstdc++-33

Your notations don't provide methodologies for setting
JAVA_HOME/JRE_HOME/CLASSPATH environment variables which are necessary
for virtually everything other than the java web browser plugin. This of
course was the crux of the OP - java's bin isn't installed in a users
$PATH.

Craig

[David]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Karl Larsen wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>     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? 

I just have to ask you Karl. What OS or Linux distribution natively
includes Sun Java? What OS or Linux distribution natively includes the
Nvidia drivers that you install?


- --


  David

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkd2V7QACgkQAO0wNI1X4QHg0wCgkR/e3siowxSS9i0udIyjT8Wo
> tacAoPhNC048+Au1/egN09lXE9zZ7nKa
> =YHBi
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Les Mikesell]

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.

>  Thus with those restrictions, there is no way that Fedora or Red Hat
>  would ever distribute it. 
OK, there's this thing called the internet, where you can get things 
from other places - places that are willing to distribute 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.

>  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?

>  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?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Gene Heskett]

On Friday 28 December 2007, Les Mikesell wrote:
> Cameron Simpson wrote:
> >>>> Hi
> >>>> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
> >>>> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
> >>>> can any one suggest some thing about that ?
> >>>
> >>> ----
> >>> look in /usr/java
> >>>
> >>> if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
> >>> but that should never be necessary.
> >>
> >> It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live.
> >
> > It's a third party RPM!
> > Of course it should install out of the way!
> > That way you can use Sun's RPM or another RPM, or both!
> >
> >> For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this
> >> breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.
> >
> > 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. 
+5 at least, Les.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
For a man to truly understand rejection, he must first be ignored by a cat.

[Cameron Simpson]

On 28Dec2007 16:58, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 23:39 +0200, eng.waleed wrote:
> >> Hi
> >> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
> >> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
> >> can any one suggest some thing about that ? 
> > ----
> > look in /usr/java
> >
> > if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
> > but that should never be necessary.
>
>  It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live.   
It's a third party RPM!
Of course it should install out of the way!
That way you can use Sun's RPM or another RPM, or both!

>  For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this 
>  breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6. 
Maybe there should be something in /etc/alternatives...
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs(a)zip.com.au&gt; DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

I could make tons of mispellings, punctuation errors, and grammatical errors
and still write more understandable English because I do it in the same
manner as Americans who were born in the USA and have lived here for many
years.  - Audio Engineer <acoustic(a)world.std.com&gt;

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 16:58 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>  Craig White wrote:
>  > On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 23:39 +0200, eng.waleed wrote:
>  >> Hi
>  >> I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
>  >> give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
>  >> can any one suggest some thing about that ? 
>  > ----
>  > look in /usr/java
>  > 
>  > if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
>  > but that should never be necessary.
>  
>  It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live. 
>     For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this 
>  breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6. 
----
patience...

They are finally getting around to licensing it under GPL, things are
finally stabilizing.

Craig

[Les Mikesell]

Craig White wrote:
>  On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 23:39 +0200, eng.waleed wrote:
> > Hi
> > I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
> > give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
> > can any one suggest some thing about that ? 
>  ----
>  look in /usr/java
>  
>  if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
>  but that should never be necessary. 
It's too bad that RedHat and Sun can't agree on where java should live. 
   For earlier versions of fedora, jpackage.org had a way to fix this 
breakage, but they seem to have stopped at FC6.

-- 
    Les Mikesell
      lesmikesell(a)gmail.com

[Martin Marques]

eng.waleed escribió:
>  Hi
>  I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it give 
>  me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ , can any 
>  one suggest some thing about that ? 
Don't know about java but use rpm -ql to see what files came in the rpm 
package.

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 23:39 +0200, eng.waleed wrote:
>  Hi
>  I installed the jre from the file jre-6u3-linux-i586-rpm.bin and it
>  give me done with no prob , but there is no java file in /usr/bin/ ,
>  can any one suggest some thing about that ?  
----
look in /usr/java

if you know what you want, you can create a symbolic link in /usr/bin
but that should never be necessary.

What you probably want to do is set some environmental variables...

# cat /etc/profile.d/java.sh
#
# For java-gcj-compat package standard install of fedora
# PATH=$PATH:/usr/share/java
# CLASSPATH=/usr/share/java
# export CLASSPATH

CLASSPATH=/usr/java/jre
export J2RE_HOME=/usr/java/jre
export PATH=$J2RE_HOME/bin:$PATH
JAVA_HOME=/usr/java/jdk1.6.0_03
export JAVA_HOME

where I have created some symbolic links...

# ls -l /usr/java/
total 4
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   16 2007-12-17 11:50 default -> /usr/java/latest
drwxr-xr-x 9 root root 4096 2007-12-17 11:50 jdk1.6.0_03
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   26 2007-12-17 11:51 jre
-> /usr/java/jdk1.6.0_03/jre/
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   21 2007-12-17 11:50 latest
-> /usr/java/jdk1.6.0_03

Craig