Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Announcements Operating Systems Java Programming BSD

Native Java JDK 1.3.1 Support For FreeBSD 231

Posted by simoniker from the latest-and-greatest-revisited dept.
ap writes "Justin T. Gibbs, of the FreeBSD Foundation, announced today the availability of a native binary release of the Java JDK 1.3.1 for FreeBSD. He also mentioned that more attention will now be focused on providing a release of the 1.4.x JDK. Such developments should allow for FreeBSD to be better suited for enterprise uses."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Native Java JDK 1.3.1 Support For FreeBSD More

Native Java JDK 1.3.1 Support For FreeBSD

Comments Filter:

  • Somewhere, in a noisy hospital room (Score:4, Funny)

    by Lane.exe ( 672783 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:23PM (#6787912) Homepage
    [a man in a white coat stands over the BSD devil, holding defibrillators]

    "CLEAR!"

    [loud zapping noise]

    "Ladies and gentlenerds... BSD is no longer dying."

    Someone had to say it

  • Quick! (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Glock27 ( 446276 )
    Time for the BSD Babe post again... ;-)

  • bout damn time (Score:3, Informative)

    by SHEENmaster ( 581283 ) <travis&utk,edu> on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:26PM (#6787948) Homepage Journal
    but "binary only" probably means "x86-32 binary based upon libs from FreeBSD 3.1"

    I'm still waiting for a PowerPC(G3/750cx) build of J2DK 1.4.1. Sun won't offer it, blackdown won't offer it, and IBM's build just promptly segaults when run.
    • what about the other one Red hat is contibuting to?

      GNU clearPath?

      • GNU clearPath?

        This is flamebait, so mods should make sure to mod it as such.

        I'm thinkig about starting a project and callig it GNV, for GNV's Not Vapor.

    • Re:bout damn time (Score:4, Informative)

      by KrispyKringle ( 672903 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:35PM (#6788654)
      Apparently the whole point is merely that Sun is now offering a license for the FreeBSD binary, which allows the FreeBSD team to distribute a binary pkg. There are a number of jdks available in the ports collection for you to build yourself; I have no intention of changing the setup on my FreeBSD machine, since the sdk I compiled myself works fine.
    • This announcement means that I can (presumably) finally get Freenet [freenetproject.org] running on my spare FreeBSD box. I hadn't been able to figure out how to get the quasi-official, not guaranteed to be functional, volunteer java ports [freebsd.org] (which may or may not actually include NIO, which Freenet uses) installed on FBSD. I'd pretty much given up.

      This is great news, even if it's binary-only! My thanks to Sun and to the FreeBSD Java team.
    • The reason why Sun Microsystems won't offer a release for Apple is because Steve Jobs said that Apple will take care of it. This was on a press release from apple on their site (http://www.apple.com) a few years ago. However, it is no longer there.

      This was initially a problem for a project I started that was supposed to use Java 1.3 and there was no Mac support, but we had to support it anyways (not fun to integrate 1.1 & 1.3 Java code).

  • Stupid Question (Score:4, Interesting)

    by boris_the_hacker ( 125310 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:31PM (#6788011) Homepage
    Ok, this is probably a stupid question that could probably be solved by a little googling, but I shall ask anyway, does this mean that Java can finally be run on FreeBSD or is this just a native port of a JVM (where previous JVM's have been running in some form of emulation) ?

    Is it only now that FreeBSD people can run Java code ?

    Sorry if this is stupid but I have never played with FreeBSD.

    • Re:Stupid Question (Score:5, Informative)

      by moderators_are_w*nke ( 571920 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:35PM (#6788076) Journal
      FreeBSD (actually, AFAIK, all the BSDs) have had native Java for ages as part of the ports system, but because of Sun's licencing, you had to compile it yourself, which can take some time. A binary release just makes it easier for some users to run native Java.

      FreeBSD (and probable other BSDs) can also run an emulated Linux Java virtual machine.

      Mark
      • Awesome, thank you very much :)

        It did strike me odd that if this was the first outing of Java, that FreeBSD was so popular as the base system for web applications.

        It now makes perfect sense :)

        • Re:Stupid Question (Score:4, Interesting)

          by markv242 ( 622209 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:13PM (#6788383)
          Actually, even the compiled-with-patches version of the 1.3 JDK was listed as not being production ready. Therefore, probably not safe to use for your applications.

          If this is truly production ready 1.3 JDK (1.3, guys? Surely you could have gotten 1.4 done in the same time) then FreeBSD is once again a serious Java hosting environment.

      • I think you are all wrong.

        BSD* has no java port.

        BSD* does no run an emulated Linux Java virtual machine. Instead it run it as a normal process
        and maps Linux calls to simular BSD calls.
        • Thats not how it looks from here:

          bash-2.05b$ ls /usr/ports/java | grep jdk
          jdk11
          jdk11-doc
          jdk12
          jdk12-doc
          jdk13
          j d k13-doc
          jdk14
          jdk14-doc
          linux-blackdown-jdk12
          linux-blackdown-jdk13
          linux-blackdown-jdk14
          linu x-ibm-jdk13
          linux-ibm-jdk14
          linux-sun-jdk12
          lin ux-sun-jdk13
          linux-sun-jdk14

          bash-2.05b$ cd /usr/ports/java/jdk14
          bash-2.05b$ cat pkg-descr
          This is the latest patchset from the Java 2 FreeBSD porting project. This
          port allows you to easily build a native JDK1.4.1 for FreeBSD.

          Please note that due to the current Su

        • Re:Stupid Question (Score:4, Informative)

          by JDizzy ( 85499 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @06:17PM (#6789040) Homepage Journal
          I think you are all wrong.
          Reminds me of the town fool. Everyone knows your a fool, but when you open your mouth you simultaniously remove any doubt.

          BSD* has no java port.
          Yes it does.

          BSD* does no run an emulated Linux Java virtual machine. Instead it run it as a normal process
          and maps Linux calls to simular BSD calls.
          FreeBSD has a linux emulation layer, for running linux applications, and so the linux apps think they are talking to a linux kernel and userland. FreeBSD can, and many people do, run the linux JDK under emulation. In fact, to compile the native version of JDK on FreeBSD you have to boot-strap it with the linux version (java requires java to install). Afterwards folks can use the native version to build the native BSD version again. BTW - the process of mapping linux syscalls to their BSD counter part is called emulation.

          • FreeBSD has a linux emulation layer, for running linux applications

            No, it doesn't.

            "Yeah, but is this really emulation? No. It is an ABI implementation, not an emulation. There is no emulator (or simulator, to cut off the next question) involved." FreeBSD Handbook [freebsd.org]
            • Funny how that link is:

              http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/book s /h andbook/linuxemu-advanced.html

              Notice the "emu" in the linkage?

              So why is it sometimes called ``Linux emulation''? To make it hard to sell FreeBSD! Really, it is because the historical implementation was done at a time when there was really no word other than that to describe what was going on; saying that FreeBSD ran Linux binaries was not true, if you did not compile the code in or load a module, and there needed to be a word to

    • You could do before, but it was really ugly.

      Installing Java required patches all over the place, and the ports system of compiling from code meant that trying to set up a server with Java (like Tomcat or Resin) would pull down a ton of X related UI stuff that you'd have to clean up afterwards.

      On top of that, there were some stability issues because of the differences in threading models and wotnot.
      • Getting Java itself to run on FreeBSD was no problem for me. Getting Tomcat to work was pretty difficult, but as far as I can tell, this is largely due to Tomcat, not FreeBSD (as in, the same problems exist, to a greater or lesser extent, on Linux).

        Tomcat itself works fine, actually, but mod_jserv or mod_jk are a bit of an issue for me; jserv is no longer maintained and is outdated, while jk apparently doesn't play well with Apache 1.3. Like I said, this is apparently more of an issue with Tomcat than wi

  • Just to be clear (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Moridineas ( 213502 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:32PM (#6788026) Journal
    This doesn't mean that you previously couldn't run Java on FreeBSD. You could previously built a native java binary (though you needed to install the Linux JDK first) or you could run the Linux JDK directly.

    Now the FreeBSD binaries are certified by Sun (which apparently is hard as anything to get done) and they can be distributed directly as a binary.

    • Re:Just to be clear (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Just to be clear, this does not work on newer versions of FreeBSD only 4.8.
      If you have 5.0 or more reccent, your are SOL.
    • "Now the FreeBSD binaries are certified by Sun (which apparently is hard as anything to get done) and they can be distributed directly as a binary. "

      So, should it be easier, and then we can have a bunch of shitty JDK's out there. Now, I'm sure someone will mod this as a flame, but I work for a company that does a lot of java development, and if there were not reliable Java JDK's (if they were "easier" to certify), that would really really suck.
      • Wow talk about reading something into nothing... I was merely reporting that the process of certification is not easy--and it took a lot of effort from a lot of good programmers. Did I say ANYWHERE that it should be easy? Did I even imply anywhere that the certification program was bad and should be changed?

        Also, why did you put "easier" in quotes the way you did ?

  • Native Threads Support? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by slagdogg ( 549983 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:34PM (#6788060)
    Does this version actually include support for native threads? IIRC, there has been a "native" version of the JDK for FreeBSD for a while now but it only supported green threads when I last looked.
    • Good question. This is one of several reasons I switched from FreeBSD to Linux. I had serious performance issues using a green-thread JDK for J2EE development. May seem a petty reason, but after being a big FreeBSD support since 2.0, I haven't looked back after switching to Gentoo Linux.
    • Both the JDK 1.3 and 1.4 ports feature the HotSpot virtual machine which requires native threads. So the answer to your question is YES.

    • Re:Native Threads Support? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Wastl ( 809 ) on Tuesday August 26, 2003 @02:29AM (#6791855) Homepage
      As far as I know you can have native threads with the JDK 1.3 port and above if you are running under FreeBSD 5.1. Here the message from the Makefile:

      "You must have a version of FreeBSD later than 4.7-STABLE February 2003 or 5-CURRENT February 2003 to use either native threads or HotSpot."

      However, native threads do not work for the Java plugin in Mozilla yet.

      Sebastian

      • From what you are quoting native threads are supported in both 4-STABLE and 5.1. FreeBSD later than 4.7-STABLE includes 4.8-RELEASE and all of the STABLE branch after February 2003.
        I think you are also wrong about the plugin. I beleive that plugin *only* supports native threading, so if it works at all, it must be using native threads.
    • I am running JDK 1.4 patchlevel 3 on my FreeBSD 4.8 Release p3 server. It is compiled as native threads. Patchlevel 3 was the first release that worked for me with native threads, but required a command line option to make to build. (going from memory as i've had it since march) Before I upgraded, I ran 1.3.1 p7 for a time with green threads.

      Linux versions of the JDK will run fine as root, but tend to crash with certain apps and services. Tomcat is known to crash with a linux jdk as a non root user.

      T

  • Sorry for my butchering (Score:5, Funny)

    by Exiler ( 589908 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:34PM (#6788061)
    Kernel collector: Bring out your dead!

    Troll: Here's one.

    Kernel collector: Ninepence.

    BSD:I'm not dead!

    Kernel collector: What?

    Troll: Nothing. Here's your ninepence.

    BSD: I'm not dead!

    Kernel collector:'Ere. He says he's not dead!

    Troll:Yes, he is.

    BSD:I'm not!

    Kernel collector:He isn't?

    Troll:Well, he will be soon. He's very outdated.

    BSD:I'm getting updates!

    Troll: No, you're not. You'll be stone dead in a moment.

    Kernel collector: Oh, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.

    BSD: I don't want to go off the net!

    Troll: Oh, don't be such a microkernel.

    Kernel collector: I can't take him.

    BSD: I feel stable!

    Troll:Well, do us a favour.

    Kernel collector: I can't.

    Troll: Well, can you hang around a couple of processes? He won't be long.

    Kernel collector:No, I've got to go to Microsofts. They've lost 4 today.

    Troll:Well, when's your next round?

    Kernel collector:Thursday.

    BSD:I think I'll go for a compile.

    Troll:You're not fooling anyone, you know. Look. Isn't there something you can do?

    BSD: [singing]
    I have Java! I have Java!

    *Twack*
    Troll: Ah, thanks very much.

    Kernel collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday.

    Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 14.9).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 14.9).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 14.9).

  • Native Java! Now FreeBSDers ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Chromodromic ( 668389 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:40PM (#6788124)
    ... can process Java code that's not a bit slower [bagley.org] than native Java on Windows.

    Orrr ... They can just stick with mod_perl or WebWare for Python [sourceforge.net] or PHP [php.net] or some other truly open source technology that isn't controlled by forty-thousand corporations all with an invested business interest in competing with Microsoft.

    I swear to God, every time I hear a phrase like "suited to the Enterprise" it's accompanied by a Java, Microsoft, or IBM article, all of which have a huge interest in convincing you that in order to sell a widget on the Internet you've absolutely, no-question, gotta have nineteen layers of logical infrastructure completely independent of each other otherwise your site's gonna go down and boy are you going to pay. In the meantime, sites like Yahoo run their e-commerce off of Lisp, PHP is their standardizing implementation language, Amazon is hiring Perl programmers, and Slashdot, a site which regularly DOSes other sites by virtue of it's power to link, runs on Perl.

    But if you really want to be successful YOU NEED JAVA FOR THE "ENTERPRISE". Only with Java can you take half the time to express what takes twice as much typing to code. Or maybe by "Enterprise" what everyone really means is the USS Enterprise? Maybe that's why it could max out to warp 7.

    • Bad examples. (Score:5, Informative)

      by markv242 ( 622209 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:10PM (#6788360)
      (Every time I post this sort of message, I get +5. I hate karma whoring like this, but once again it's time for some education.) "Amazon is hiring Perl programmers" leads the reader to believe that Amazon is running Perl in some major shape or form. They aren't. They are running Java servlets under... Weblogic, I believe. "Slashdot...runs on Perl." leads the reader to believe that Slashdot is a complicated website. It isn't. Incidentally, have you clicked on the "Friends" tab on your user page lately? What an incredibly slow response (and that isn't a bandwidth issue). None of the technologies you listed (mod_perl, Python, PHP, etc) handle any type of failure well at all. Show me a PHP-based site, hosted on multiple machines, that provides load-balanced and automatic failover of in-memory session data. I'll give you a clue: you won't find one, because it is impossible to do shared memory over a cluster of machines in PHP, mod_perl, Python, etc etc. On the other hand, I can list off a whole slew of Java app servers that can do clustered, load-balanced, full-failover shared memory without even blinking. Resin [caucho.com] is an awesome example of an extremely inexpensive application server that currently does nearly everything you need an app server to do. Want to know a little secret? The PHP team is moving more towards an application-server architecture, because they know that the native compiled-in mod to Apache/iPlanet/etc is kludgy. They're cooperating with Sun and others on JSF so PHP will be able to speak with Java applications in a more efficient way. mod_perl I won't even bother with. The MVC model simply won't work under mod_perl. Good luck with an implementation team of more than, say, 5 people.
      • Agreed! I'd mod parent up, but I've already posted to this thread. I've been working in an environment that includes a perl application using mod_per+apache, mysql, and a java app server. The perl app is 3rd party and is generally considered well put together. Deploying the perl app and apache is always a nightmare, recently spent hours tracking down a bug in a CPAN module. (at least they proved test cases so you can see the modules fail before they install) Automating the deployment is very difficult, obv
        • Automating the deployment is very difficult, obviously the developers expect you to spend hours changing hard coded paths in lines of source code and config files every time you want to deploy it.

          You have to have policies for developers for not to hardcode anything. BTW with mod_perl httpd.conf could have scripts inside for automating things.

          And deploymentwise I didn't have problems with mod_per and apache. You just have to set up it once, create package and deploy it on any number of servers...

      • Re:Bad examples. (Score:5, Informative)

        by Dom2 ( 838 ) on Tuesday August 26, 2003 @01:52AM (#6791746) Homepage
        The MVC model simply won't work under mod_perl

        Hmmm, you must be smoking something good. Whilst there are some things you can't do under mod_perl (realtime perhaps), MVC is not one of them. In fact, you have an enourmous amount of choice when it comes to mod_perl and MVC - mason [masonhq.com], Apache::Template [tt2.org], PageKit [pagekit.org], AxKit [axkit.org] and so on. There are many other tools to help you with MVC, or you can roll your own if you've sufficient hubris to think that none of the existing stuff does its job.

        Please try to research your rants a little better.

        -Dom

      • Re:Bad examples. (Score:3, Informative)

        by pnatural ( 59329 )
        Funny that you mention Python twice but the OP never mentioned it once.

        FYI, python "handles failure" quite nicely, and it does it in the manner that it should. Namely, it refuses to guess when faced with ambiguity, and it propigates exceptions nicely (and more easily at the code level than does Java, btw).

        FYI, it is not "impossible to do shared memory". Fact is, python does shared memory [jhu.edu] aplenty.

        You sound like the programmers I've encountered that know one or two languages, and subsequently feel threat
      • Do you post the above message often?

        If you're looking for a technology that can handle persistent/shared sessions for clustering, then you're definately going to need Java. Or PHP (with MySQL+sessions). Or Python (ZEO, just as one example- there's always using an RDBMS keyed on a session-key). Or Perl (as above).

        PHP especially (though I am not a fan) makes this as transparent as HTTPSession (and I've set up enough J2EE servers in my time to know that it's not easy, nor is it in anyway standard across vend
      • Zope.

        And that's written in python, monsieur.

    • Re:Native Java! Now FreeBSDers ... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by butane_bob2003 ( 632007 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:26PM (#6788564) Homepage
      Um, those layers of logical infrastructure and indirection are called interfaces and they are there to provide abstractions and encapsulation. Which can be very nice in large systems. I started with bash, perl, c, and PHP, but for rapid development of enterprise apps, Java won out. The only thing _close to J2EE is .NET, which is a complete rip off of J2EE (and a complete mess in places). I've worked on web systems hacked together in Perl using a bunch of CPAN modules, none of it comes close to a real development framework. Not to bash perl or anything, but just because you can do something cool using two non-descriptive characters does not mean you should. I dont get paid for using less keystrokes.

    • Re:Native Java! Now FreeBSDers ... (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I am glad for BSD folks, but SUN released 1.3.1 at may 2001. With such a seriously long lag no serious Java developer would consider FreeBSD as suitable platform for Java apps.

      • Re:Native Java! Now FreeBSDers ... (Score:4, Informative)

        by Pieroxy ( 222434 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @06:16PM (#6789036) Homepage
        At the contrary, it is a perfect opportunity.

        They're just granting the license for FreeBSD, nothing else. Now the other JDKs will come in very quickly and in no time, FreeBSD will be an "official" Java platform.

        It doesn't mean anything technically, since all JDKs are supported natively for a long time, btu in terms of marketting, it is a major step.

  • 1.3.1?? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by John Seminal ( 698722 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @04:41PM (#6788135) Journal
    That is an older version of the JVM which will be missing some classes that are being used by Java programmers. So much for being up to date.

    BTW, why are they only now getting around to offering the Java SDK on BSD? Is there something more difficult about running Java on BSD than on another OS like linux?

    • Re:1.3.1?? (Score:5, Informative)

      by __past__ ( 542467 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:05PM (#6788327)
      Is there something more difficult about running Java on BSD than on another OS like Linux?
      Yes, there is. BSD isn't hyped, and Sun doesn't sell computers with BSD preinstalled. That means that it isn't part of their definition of "everywhere" (as in "write once, run everywhere"), and they won't do more than they absolutely have to to support it.

      Oh, you meant technical reasons? Java works fine on BSD, and has for a long time. We are talking about licensing issues here.

      • It also doesn't help that Sun requires a very substantial "donation" for permitting a binary jdk distribution. The FreeBSD Foundation had to pony up major bucks for this to happen. Red Hat, et al, ponied up to Sun for a Linux binary jdk a long before FreeBSD did.
    • As the previous reply pointed out, Java has worked fine on FreeBSD for some time. This is no real change for anyone other than lawyers.

      In regards to your comment about the "older version of the JVM", I'd be curious which classes are an issue for you. I'm sure there are some; I've occasionally run into issues with stuff I wrote in 1.4 not working on 1.3, but for the most part, it's not a big deal. Although you really can simply compile 1.4 yourself if you care.

    • Re:1.3.1?? (Score:3, Informative)

      by thanjee ( 263266 )
      Considering Macintosh OS 9.X doesn't even support Java 1.2 yet (they are working on it), I think FreeBSD are doing okay.

      The sources have been there a long time - it's just a rubber stamp approving a precompiled version. Besides which, what BSD user out there really cares about having to compile source files themselves? It's as easy as typing in "make" :)

      • OS 9.x is a deprecated platform. Apple is no longer shipping a bootable version, and minimal work is being done on compatibility. OS X has Java 1.4.

    • Re:1.3.1?? (Score:5, Informative)

      by MobyTurbo ( 537363 ) on Tuesday August 26, 2003 @02:24AM (#6791839)
      That is an older version of the JVM which will be missing some classes that are being used by Java programmers. So much for being up to date.
      A native 1.4 sun jdk is in ports, I haven't tested it yet though. I assume that 1.4 in binary form will be forthcoming.
      BTW, why are they only now getting around to offering the Java SDK on BSD?
      FreeBSD has had a native Java 2 SDK for years, but they needed a Sun license in order to distribute binaries. Before you had to compile it in ports, which due to all of the point and click licenses Sun required you couldn't do in an automated fashion.

  • for(;;){

    Thread t = new Thread( new someRunnableClass() );

    t.start();

    }

  • Nvidia lists FreeBSD support (Score:4, Informative)

    by Gherald ( 682277 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:06PM (#6788328) Journal
    Somewhat OT, but it really impressed me today when I went to the Nvidia site and clicked "Download Drivers" --> "Graphics Driver" --> "Geforce and TNT"

    And saw listed for choices:

    Windows XP / 2000
    Windows NT4
    Windows 95 / 98 / ME
    Linux IA32
    Linux AMD64
    Linux IA64
    FreeBSD

    I don't know whether Nvidia's support is new (it probably isn't) but this is the first time I noticed it listed.

    I was like: "Wow, people actually use this OS enough that a major graphics company provides drivers on their main download page."

    Sorry if this isn't news, I just thought it was cool.
    • It's new-ish; I don't check the site that regularly, but I'm pretty sure that the FreeBSD drivers have been there for only 6 months or so.

    • Re:Nvidia lists FreeBSD support (Score:4, Informative)

      by Arandir ( 19206 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @06:04PM (#6788926) Homepage Journal
      FreeBSD support has been around about six months or so. I built a new system a couple of weeks ago, and chose a Nvidia card precisely because they supported FreeBSD. I've got a GeForce FX 5200 and there are no problems.

      I used to bash Nvidia all day long for keeping their drivers closed, but it seems like ATI has been asleep at the wheel for a couple of years now with regards to specs, so what you gonna do? It's not like there are any other consumer grade video card manfuacturers anymore. Matrox still seems to be in business, but just try finding one of their cards.

  • So its happened... (Score:5, Funny)

    by holzp ( 87423 ) on Monday August 25, 2003 @05:13PM (#6788396)
    To defeat Gates, Scott McNealy has finally made a deal with the devil..er..daemon..

  • a day late and a dollar short (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    As far as I know Windows have had native support for Java for ages. Actually since Microsoft and Sun signed an agreement about this back in 1997 that deals with this issue. So the fact that FreeBSD got this is fine but not exactly revolutionary.
  • I have been anxious for this release for some time. In many ways it is important to have a current Java Runtime on FreeBSD. I have considered migrating everything over to Linux but then I would miss out on all of the benefits of the FreeBSD Ports Collection. I also feel the FreeBSD release engineering team and the core developers do an excellent job of managing the project. By producing a native Java Runtime I do not have not have to entertain the prospect of using Linux... [and then paying SCO for the

  • 1.3.1? (Score:1, Redundant)

    by butane_bob2003 ( 632007 )
    Call me redundant, but Java 1.4.1 has been out for a few months, 1.4.2 was recently released, 1.5 is in development. So I can finally use Collections on BSD? Whooopee. I guess Java developers could care less about BSD anyway, speed not being the primary, all overriding, all encompassing concern.
  • You'd think that Sun would be mor eproactive in porting it to various platforms. WIth freebsd it was almost as if they were trying to prevent it.

  • Kaffe (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm glad to see that Sun is allowing Sun Java to be released for FreeBSD. Hopefully 1.4.2 will be released sooner or later. There are, however, some other alternatives. Kaffe (www.kaffe.org) is a project to make a free JVM. They are making slow but steady progress on that. Also, gcj is both a compiler and a JVM. Hopefully there will soon be some viable non-Sun Java alternatives.

  • Non-x86? (Score:2)

    by DdJ ( 10790 )
    The announcement made no mention of this release being x86-specific. Is it in fact x86-specific? I'm trying to figure out what OS to put on a new Alpha motherboard I just got, and if FreeBSD will get me a working Sun-based Java on it, then I'll install FreeBSD.

    (Significantly different uncertified versions of Java need not apply. I am not going to use an open source JVM, and I am not going to do without the JDK 1.3 class libraries. Those are just not realistic options for what I want to do.)
  • FreeBSD is now even better suited as standard platforms for ERP systems. Good ERP systems started out on AS/400 systems which provided the most robustness. Theyve since moved to Java and Windows 2000. Supporting and consulting for ERP systems on Windows2000 systems is huge business and the first big ERP software company that will support FreeBSD will grab a new market.

    And THEN we'll find work.
  • Good news I have set my rating to 1 and can know see 71 out of 157 bsd posts! Things are finally starting to turn around, for poor old freebsd. Good thing /. uses a Java interface.

Slashdot Top Deals

"All the people are so happy now, their heads are caving in. I'm glad they are a snowman with protective rubber skin" -- They Might Be Giants

Close