Fwd: Binary plugs download
joe.darcy at oracle.com
Mon Nov 29 07:12:37 PST 2010
On 11/28/2010 5:52 PM, Lussier, Denis wrote:
> Aren't the binary plugs still used for vanilla OpenJDK 6 builds that
> don't use Iced Tea??
The binary plugs have not been required for an out-of-the-box OpenJDK 6
build since b07:
"OpenJDK 6: Sources for b07 and b08 published"
The sole remaining binary plug for SNMP support may be used if desired.
> I know I had to set them up in the OpenSCG build farm for Windoze
> and Linux, last year when I started with Build 16, and they are still
> there but perhaps are unneeded. I also have the
> messy/scary/confusing add-on verbage in the license for the one
> click-installers explaining why it all ain't pure GPL v2.
> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com
> <mailto:aph at redhat.com>> wrote:
> On 11/26/2010 02:48 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
> > On 11/25/10 3:15 AM, kevin diggs wrote:
> >> The section of the page:
> >> http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk7/
> >> for downloading has a heading that says:
> >> Linux platform
> >> If this is for x86 only then please label it as such (more than
> >> i586 buried in the file/link name).
> >> Linux actually runs on quite a lot of different hardware (I got
> me an
> >> ultra2 that can run Linux; a bunch of PowerMacs too. Even a DEC
> >> That would be a real hoot getting a JDK on that thing. Oh I forgot
> >> about the 040 based Quadra 700.).
> >> Sorry for the rant. But this kinda pushes my buttons.
> > Hm. It's been a long time since I heard of anyone use the binary
> plugs for anything.
> > Certainly neither regular OpenJDK builds nor IcedTea builds do.
> So if they just serve
> > to confuse people to assume they are in some way necessary,
> maybe we should just remove
> > them from the download site for good.
> > Any objections?
> Why bother? People sometimes want to check out and build old
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the build-dev