Ubuntu 11.10 VM including OpenJDK Build Image

Wade Chandler hwadechandler-openjdk at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 24 13:58:23 UTC 2012

On 02/24/2012 04:20 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 02:21 AM, Wade Chandler wrote:
>> On 02/23/2012 10:56 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> On 02/23/2012 01:53 PM, Wade Chandler wrote:
>>>> Forgot to send to list before...
>>>> On 02/23/2012 05:09 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>>>> On 02/23/2012 04:09 AM, Wade Chandler wrote:
>>>>>> Perhaps this is being done for Fedora. I was under the impression
>>>>>> from the recent push, or at least perceived push, from Oracle to get
>>>>>> folks using the OpenJDK and not their builds distributed within an
>>>>>> operating system
>>>>> I don't understand.  OpenJDK is distributed within an OS.  Where did
>>>>> they say this?
>>>> Here I'm specifically referring to the EOL of the OS bundle license for
>>>> the Sun/Oracle distributed runtimes. For instance, on Ubuntu now, one
>>>> needs to go get the Oracle version specifically from them versus it
>>>> being able to be installed from the Ubuntu software center.
>>> You're not really explaining this very well.  Why would the EOL of
>>> JDK 6 have any bearing on this?
>> I'm not referring to an EOL of Java 6. What I'm referring to is an
>> EOL of allowing operating system providers to provide Oracles
>> JRE/JDK in operating systems.
> Ah, you mean the proprietary JDK.  Please, please, if you mean the
> proprietary JDK, say so, or everything will get horribly confused.
> Or at least I will!  :-)
>> That forces Linux distros to distribute OpenJDK only and users to
>> get Oracle JDK 7,8,etc on their own if there is to be such a thing
>> and obviously depending on its price.
> Well, OK.  So what?  Why would anybody care?  OpenJDK is just fine.
This is all my opinion of course, we have gotten down into this 
conversation, but all the points here are related to exactly the reasons 
we have been talking about. So, here is the rest of my thought process 
on this topic, and will just leave it at that.

To answer "So what? Why would anybody care?" Really?

What is OpenJDK? Every Linux distros OpenJDK is what? Testing is what? 
Users download what? Today, many applications have issues running on 
OpenJDK because of differences. If OpenJDK is the defacto Java, and it 
has issues compared to the previous defacto Java, and TCKs are not run 
on distributions for popular operating systems easily grabbed from the 
site, and there are no binary downloads available, or at least this is 
perceived because of having to find each and everyone in one of hundreds 
of projects, then what is it, and how can many application developers 
use it, and without those end user developers, how does it continue to 
be as strong as it is today?

For me the binary distribution is a big part of this. OpenJDK may be 
more important than NetBeans or Eclipse, but only because there are more 
applications using it. Without good IDEs there won't be many developers 
writing applications for it. The new comers will be doing what all of us 
did when we were younger as it relates to Java, but with different 
technologies; using the free IDEs for C/C++, Python, PHP (which I also 
do today, but still a valid point). If it doesn't remain as easily 
accessible as Java has in the past I am of the opinion it will not 
remain on top, and my reason for these points on easily downloadable 

Here they miss a key point on Linux binaries and user testing:

from OpenJDK:
"*Download* and install <http://openjdk.java.net/install/index.html> the 
open-source JDK 6 for most popular Linux distributions. If you came here 
looking for Oracle JDK 6 product binaries for Solaris, Linux, or 
Windows, which are based largely on the same code, you can download them 
from *java.oracle.com* 

Now, if the build system gets to the point where one can build a 
Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X binary easily and quickly, like pulling 
down required versions of libraries and letting build engineers override 
those as needed to make it as flexible as possible, then that is OK, but 
not perfect because I think that puts up barriers to newbies and youth 
(students) as well as people with limited time who might help the 
project track down bugs if they can get a version and go. I suppose if 
the Oracle build works the same then that could work for Linux and 
Windows, but still it isn't an artifact from the OpenJDK project as it 
is "based largely on the same code".

For instance, upcoming versions EA releases or simply validating whether 
OpenJDK runs applications running on the Oracle build or older versions 
of the JVM. Should folks wanting to help test those things out have to 
build the system? Seems that loses a lot of folks who could help track 
down bugs and make it better using their real world applications.

They "could" still do that, but it comes down to time. In most cases 
those folks are paid to work on business/domain logic. Testing and 
getting ready for new platform releases is part of that. Building the 
JDK probably not, and that isn't their fault. Some are paid to work on 
OpenJDK, and for obvious reasons, it is the basis of large vendor 
platforms. Both types are extremely important.

So, I'm not knocking it. I want it to succeed. I think there are certain 
things which can make that more probable.

But, too, that all depends on what the exact goals of OpenJDK are. If 
some of these things are not goals of OpenJDK, then that is fine too. If 
the goal of OpenJDK isn't to produce any binary result, but to instead 
be a basis for the involved vendors brands of JVMs, then I believe that 
should be stated some where on the front page as many people use Java 
and have dedicated their time to it. Such a statement makes clear that 
there are certain things folks shouldn't spend time thinking about or 
trying to push to get going.

"*What is this?* The place to collaborate on an open-source 
implementation of the Java Platform, Standard Edition 
<http://java.sun.com/javase/>, and related projects. (Learn more.) 



Wade Chandler

Software Engineer and Consultant
NetBeans Contributor
NetBeans Dream Team Member


More information about the discuss mailing list