New candidate JEP: 362: Deprecate the Solaris and SPARC Ports
peter.firmstone at zeus.net.au
Wed Oct 2 11:42:12 UTC 2019
Fork yeah, that'll do, binary compatible, perhaps the current Solaris
Sparc port would be a good basis for that, there are both intel and
sparc distro's of Illumos. But ten there are OpenBSD and Linux distro's
that run on sparc also, Fujitsu still develops sparc and Princeton's
Piton is also sparc based for research. One of few free architectures.
I have a copy of Dillos on the T5420.
On 30/09/2019 9:18 PM, Martijn Verburg wrote:
> Hi all,
> We've asked our Solaris user community if any of them are willing to
> step up and maintain the port. The illumos folks have indicated they
> may wish to start an alternative port but no takers on the solaris
> port as of yet.
> We'll work with the illumos folks to help them submit a full port
> project for review once they've worked through the commitment levels
> etc it will take.
> On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 11:28, Baesken, Matthias
> <matthias.baesken at sap.com <mailto:matthias.baesken at sap.com>> wrote:
> looks like AdoptOpenJDK stopped to provide Solaris (Sparc +
> x86) builds of OpenJDK a while ago for JDK11 or higher , see :
> It might be interesting to hear from them about user questions /
> reactions on this .
> I would like to see Solaris/Sparc still supported in OpenJDK
> until at least next LTS / JDK17 , but without knowing more
> about number of users / usage
> It is hard to give good arguments .
> Best regards, Matthias
> > On 28/09/2019 11:02, Peter Firmstone wrote:
> > > Crazy idea, builds should be tested on as many architectures
> as possible
> > > for debugging. I hope this gets downvoted.
> > That seems to me to be a very one-sided perspective you are
> offering and
> > an unwarranted if not extreme conclusion (insanity? really?).
> > Whatever the benefits to this project of being able to run on
> SPARC (and
> > ignoring, for now, the likelihood that the benefits of
> maintaining the
> > port are probably better gauged in terms of the value to users) your
> > conclusion ignores the cost of maintaining the port, not just the
> > maintenance outlay itself but the consequent lost opportunity
> cost. I
> > think a more thoughtful and balanced judgement is needed here.
> > > I've actually solved a lot of Java concurrency bugs using
> Solaris Sparc
> > > I couldn't with other architectures. That means without it,
> we would
> > > still be trying to solve those bugs.
> > I'd be interested to hear why those concurrency bugs do not (or
> > cannot) manifest on Intel or AArch64, particularly the latter.
> > > I don't know why Oracle doesn't release a developer
> workstation, with
> > > affordable developer licensing, so we can continue using
> Solaris for
> > > this purpose. There are just so many tools on Solaris
> develpers can
> > > utilise.
> > >
> > > Oracle really should start up the OpenSolaris project again too.
> > Arguments about what Oracle should or should not do with Solaris and
> > SPARC hardware are not appropriate for this thread, indeed not
> even for
> > this list or project. Please keep your comments on topic.
> > regards,
> > Andrew Dinn
> > -----------
> > Senior Principal Software Engineer
> > Red Hat UK Ltd
> > Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No.
> > Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric
More information about the jdk-dev