Slashdot Mirror

Just because Sun java isn't free doesn't mean there aren't alternatives out there.

Kaffe,
GCJ,
Jikes RVM,
Cacao,
and
others. .NET has Mono and DotGNU. That's two. So how is it "much more free"?

...and it is not a native programming language...

Actually there are native compilers available for Java: Gcj, J2exe,
Excelsior JET and Manta.

There are downsides to using native compilers though, including a) the need to maintain separate platform versions of your app, and b) the loss of the ability to decompile back to Java source. But some developers don't mind a), and the more proprietary ones positively love b). :)

Kaffe, on the other hand, isn't a native compiler in the sense that the compilers above actually cough up an executable for you at the command line. But it has a just-in-time (JIT) compilation system which translates the bytecode to native machine code on a method-by-method basis as the application is executed. This really boosts Java app performance a lot.

Mono needs a bit of work to work with PaX, but it's possible. I mentioned the necessary changes to the Kaffe team; but they apply to any JIT.

The issue is that a JIT compiler like Mono generates code at runtime. Because it's not generated in realtime (it's compiled at the loading of an executable module, one time), it's feasible to dump the executable code to a file on disk and mmap() it in.

PaX won't allow code to be generated in memory unless the program has mprotect() restrictions off and uses mprotect() right. It's safer to rewrite the JIT compiler though, since you wind up with a stricter security policy that way.

Furthermore, Exec Shield's NX emulation is flawed, and the use of mprotect() in those ways would disable the protections on large parts of the binary. If anything happens in or above the stack, the whole stack is likely executable. This is in fact one reason I prefer PaX; a slight modification to Red Hat's kernel to print X instead of - in /proc/[pid]/maps for !PROT_EXEC memory that's actually executable prints out a good deal of areas that are executable but shouldn't be (rwx vs rwX).

Mono is flexible enough that C and C++ can be compiled to .NET. Microsoft supports this, as mentioned in earlier slashdot posts. It's really important to consider .NET and Mono as insecure, and to make sure they're adequately protected. If you're running all your programs in Mono and Mono has to disable PaX, then you lose the benefit of your GrSecurity-enhanced kernel. (same with ES).

The worst thing about Java, supposedly a "write once run anywhere" language, is that you can't run anywhere. You can only run on platforms that Sun has ported a JRE to. This is why projects like Kaffe are so important. With an open-source implementation of the Java specs, you never have to worry about unsupported platforms or Sun yanking the rug out from under you.

Language-wise it's up to 1.4.

Library-wise it's kind of varied. You can see a (daily) comparison here versus GNU Classpath (which is merged with the gcj library). The main parts which are not functional are Swing and CORBA. On the other hand, some parts are complete, and some are even mature.

If it's not up to your task, don't be disappointed. Progress has been amazing recently.
(that big jump is the recent merging-in of java.xml, which was in a seperate project.)

This is what makes projects like Kaffe all the more important.

The .NET framework has a free implementation. The Java platform has a free implementation in the combination of GCJ, Kaffe, and GNU Classpath. Which is more complete in practice?

It's too bad people must be willing to use unfree software before they can use your free software.

Sun went after Microsoft because they had a contractual agreement which stated they had to produce a product with certain attributes before they can call it "Java".

Sun has never prevented alternative Java implementation, there are many.

As far as open-source there is Kaffe, GNU Classpath, GCJ, Jikes and others.

All those projects need help. And I am sure Sun is not the reason they are not getting it.

Put your money and time where your mouth is and support open-source Java

Yeah right! Magical open-source developers will come out of nowhere right?

If you want open-source Java, and feel serious about helping out, then you have GCJ and Kaffe.

Sun has allowed alternative JVMs for a long time and there are now many other JVMs to choose from.

You have your opportunity you develop Open-source Java, put your time and money where your mouth is, support Kaffe today!

Or do you just want to freeload off Sun's investement in their JVM?... Even if they already provide it for free.

Yeah right! Magical open-source developers will come out of nowhere right?

If you want open-source Java, and feel serious about helping out, then you have GCJ and Kaffe.

Sun has allowed alternative JVMs for a long time and there are now many other JVMs to choose from.

You have your opportunity you develop Open-source Java, put your time and money where your mouth is, support Kaffe today!

Or do you just want to freeload off Sun's investement in their JVM?... Even if they already provide it for free.

JREs for all major platforms are available

But some of us use minor platforms. It would be great if Java was open source. I know that projects like Kaffe are trying to produce a clean-room implementation of Java, but they have a way to go.

Cool.

This is the "Nectar" .NET virtual machine written by Tim Wilkinson's new company here in Berkeley - Hive Minded, Inc. (the name is a reference to the Borg in Star Trek).

Tim is the guy who wrote Kaffe - I used to work for him. He's no longer working on Kaffe, and I'm running the project now.

He's also the guy who wrote the first Java smart card implementation for Schlumberger (now Axalto), before Sun did their own implementation -- so he knows what he's doing. :-)

Open Source Definition vs. SCSL

Free Redistribution

Nope.

Source Code

Doesn't allow free redistribution, so redistribution in source code fails, too.

Derived Works

Nope.

Integrity of The Author's Source Code

Doesn't allow free distribution of separate modifications either.

No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

I guess it passes that one, yay!

No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor

Nope. Explicitely limits fields of endeavor to research, commercial use, or internal use.

Distribution of License

Nope. The TCK license comes with what's effectively a NDA.

License Must Not Be Specific to a Product

I guess it passes that one, yay!

License Must Not Restrict Other Software

Nope. Once you've agreed to SCSL, you can't distribute non-compliant software. So you couldn't redistribute kaffe, gcj, or even more up-to-date versions of Xerces if they break tests in the TCK.

License Must Be Technology-Neutral

Nope. It's a click-wrap license. It even has a pointless [ACCEPT] [REJECT] at the bottom

Total: 2 out of 10.

In summary, it's not open source. It's not even close.

No matter how good Gnome and KDE have gotten, if the .net and JAVA software is lacking (Mono is not nearly complete, and is exactly fighting this catch-up game, JAVA is a nifty SUN Trap)

Between gcj, Kaffe, JamVM, SableVM, all driven by the GNU Classpath library, experimental stuff like Jnode, and the massive wealth of Java code in projects like Eclipse and those driven by the Apache Foundation..

I'd say that Free java is alive and kicking. Yeah, it still hasn't become usable with respect to AWT/Swing. But most of the core is there, even up to some 1.4 stuff. (and work on 1.5 features is underway)

I don't buy the "catch-up game" argument. Most people don't write programs for the absolute latest and greatest. Platforms tend to reach a certain level of maturity which is 'good enough' for most people, and then it slows down. I think that soon enough, the free Java implementations will be able to compete with Sun's.

For example, how many compilers can you name which fully implement the C99 standard?

Everything is a catch-up game... it's just a question of what the game looks like. MS can arbitrarily change things in the Word file format just to screw with people. APIs don't work that way though, you don't change an API unless you have to.

So what would happen if an Open Source, non-Java(tm) fork were to make a desireable but incompatible improvement? Simply include it in the next revision of the official Java(tm) spec!

This is the entire point of the JSR process and it is how all changes to the Java spec-- including those that initiate within Sun itself-- make it into new versions of the spec. I'm not sure how easy it is to become a JCP member, but I'm sure Sun can be convinced there's room for the open source community on it if the open source community is willing to not just blow the JCP off.

Meanwhile I cannot fathom that Sun would not allow open source Java derivatives to implement incompatible extensions as long as those extensions do not activate without a -X flag (the -X flag is kind of java's equivalent of #pragma). One of the requirements for a JSR to be finalized is to create a reference implementation which implements the proposed extension. One of the biggest advantages of an open source sort of license for the JVM would be that it would make reference implementations for language extensions much easier; choosing a license which would prevent making experimental extensions entirely impossible would sabotage this, and be silly. I doubt Sun would do that.

So no, I don't think Sun wants "complete control over the spec" exactly, or they wouldn't have set up this standards body thing to, um, allow other people to partially control the spec. It would certainly be nice of Sun if all that happened upon violating the spec in an open source Java derivative was that your VM extension loses Java certification. However I don't think it would be the most unreasonable thing in the world if Sun demanded if you use their code (rather than, say, Kaffe's) your experimental functionality extensions don't activate unless specifically switched on by the user. It's all very well to say that such "experimental project" would "not gain widespread acceptance" but this is simply not the case-- after all, previously one such JVM with incompatible experimental extensions that were on by default shipped with a major operating system.

The prepondereance of GNU fanboys means that Java gets dissed for not being Free(tm).

The SUN's java implementation is non-free but there are other free implementations of the java standard, look at http://www.kaffe.org/ for one.

You mean this FreeBSD JVM?

The TCK is not available to licensees and there is not a cost to developing JVM's. Case in point, Kaffe is a clean room JVM implementation. They pay nothing to do development. They can't call it Java until they pass TCK but even they agree they lack key features of a fully implemented virtual machine.

One problem, I have to bundle a vm to make it autorun.

Your mono stuff looks like it can do this and totally open source.

at the moment maybe... but just might be the kick in the pants to spur a mass influx of developers to get the Kaffe project up to speed and the get the GNU Classpath expanded, cos Stallman was certainly on target with his "Java trap" article... and there's an awfull lot of people who will not want something as special as this Looking Glass to have to rely on non-free java runtimes.

Open source won't use Java until Java is open source. Most OSS developers are wary of traps like that.
(Which caused reluctance to using Qt, which sparked the Gnome project. Now Qt is free, of course.)

Java is certainly going open source. Not Sun's java, but there are plenty of open-source VM:s, and compilers, and a full implementation of the class library in the works.

I predict that, when these projects reach sufficient maturity (AWT/Swing support being the achilles heel in all the above), we will see widespread adoption of Java in the OSS community.

What Sun does will have little impact on the OSS community unless they get serious about open source and put Java under a tolerable license.

(If someone's curious about what is bad about the Sun license, see Dalibor Topic's post here, containing a point-by-point comparison to the Open-source definition.)

There are many implementations of Java, for example (props to the one AC reply to the grandparent). Sun just doesn't want people implementating wacky versions (MS J++) and calling them Java.

GNU Classpath
GCJ/GIJ
Kaffe VM
Jikes Java compiler
SableVM
Java-GTK
Documents about how to compile and use QTJava and KDEJava

What else do we need? How does all this not play well with Free software? We've got the tools, why not use them?

Get it through your head: A fork does not necessarily mean changes to the bytecode or java.*. People who don't realize that don't have imagination...

One caveat here is that there is an Open Source JVM called Kaffe, and guess what, there are a lot of Kaffe forks and it is used in all kinds of innovative research projects. The problem with Kaffe is that it isn't a full implementation of Java 1.4 so its use is somewhat limited in real production environments. It is also not as mature as Sun's Java. I wish it would catch up, but implementing Swing, etc, is a huge amount of work. This just makes the case for Open Source java even stronger.

(i) Why aren't the people yelling for open source Java busy working on Kaffe and the others?

It seems to me this is more of a "Sun, give us your code or you suck!" type of deal, than anything else.

(ii) Who is going to put up the resources to continue to research and development the Java platform? If the open source community has not been successful in creating an open source java from scratch, what makes you think that we would be able to maintain and improve the technology?

Netscape was talked into releasing and subsequently rewriting their flagship product as open source. That did not save them, in fact they spent a ton of money doing that. This move benefited the open source crowd ( I am writing this from mozilla ), but how did this help netscape?

(iii) Has OpenOffice/StarOffice improved Sun's bottom line much? Any?

Does anyone have a denfensible on plan on continuing the R&D of Java after open sourcing it? And I mean a business plan that is backed up by data?

My one complaint about EIoffice is the file formats. The last thing we need is yet another file format. OpenOffice/StarOffice, KOffice*, TextMaker*, and Abiword can all save documents in StarOffice format (* these two will have that feature in their next release). We have a rule here at SteamyMobile that you can use whatever office suite you want, so long as it uses the StarOffice format, meaning that in the future, when document search and indexing programs are released, they will all be able to use the same format. If EIOffice could that, we would use it too.

-----------
mobile porn

I disagree with the parent's tone. Mr. Tejo seems to be acting like Mono is a competetive product that Microsoft is frightened of. I'd like to remind him that Microsoft created an industry standard for the core technologies used in the .NET platform. What the Mono project is doing is exactly what Microsoft wanted somebody to do.

Why? Well, I dunno. Maybe to appease the Monopoly watchdogs. Maybe to bury Sun (I picked C# over Java and haven't been let down yet). And maybe -- just maybe -- to make it easy to use Microsoft products on alternative hardware and alternative Operating Systems without Microsoft having to worry about supporting all the obscure Linux builds of the world.

Incidentally...I too like Sun's stewardship, but it existed despite a big clean room open source intiative to reproduce Java. I remember playing around with it in college to compile somebody else's object code into native code for faster execution (our mainframe was slowwwww and at the time, running Java was like a snail on a turtle's back).

Java functionality does exist out of the box for FOSS systems. I present you Kaffe; their links page has links to several other open-source Java implementations, if it doesn't strike your fancy. In fact, the kernel has a module that allows Java execution directly like it executes ELF binaries; I don't know whether it's open or closed source, though, but it runs perfectly with *any* JVM you specify, not necessarily Sun's.

Acrobat is stupid. There've been FOSS PDF readers and/or writers for years, now. Why exactly do I want to use Adobe's? Their version 6 was much worse than 5; I still use that old version on my Windows machines, and they display every document perfectly. In my Linux machines, I use Gnome PDF Viewer, and so far I haven't had a problem.

As for Real Player, I've seen some Japanese sites which allow downloads in Real format; most streaming video out there on the Net, though, is generally some form of AVI. Frankly, I don't see much of a difference.

Finally, Flash. Now, I don't really know if there are any FOSS Flash Players, but it may become necessary to have that functionality especially if you have a graphic designer in your house. However, SVG use is on the rise, thanks to several folks including the GNOME project. Who knows? It might even displace Flash as a medium of choice for animation, one which does not leave you prone to sudden patent fees (.gif, anyone?)

Thank you for being concerned with the usability of desktop computers, but it pays to look what exactly is being discussed. No one said that having a Java VM out of the box is bad, only that having Sun's and claiming there's only FOSS in your distribution is.

Don't forget that there's a whole run-time library associated with Java. You have the language specifications, of course, but there's also all the classes that are coming with the JRE already. These are available in source code within the Java SDK, but under a more restrictive license. And then there's also, of course, the compiler itself, the virtual machine, and tools like javadoc. OK, there's kaffe, for instance, but they're not completely there yet (read their What is Kaffe not? section on the title page). There's also GNU classpath to replace Java's core class libraries, but they're not quite there yet either.

Don't forget that there's a whole run-time library associated with Java. You have the language specifications, of course, but there's also all the classes that are coming with the JRE already. These are available in source code within the Java SDK, but under a more restrictive license. And then there's also, of course, the compiler itself, the virtual machine, and tools like javadoc. OK, there's kaffe, for instance, but they're not completely there yet (read their What is Kaffe not? section on the title page). There's also GNU classpath to replace Java's core class libraries, but they're not quite there yet either.

And now the Sun "Java" Desktop, which presumably comes with Java built in, but does that mean you can double-click on a .jar file and your app starts up? No. You have to write a shell script, or add an icon with a command like "java -classpath foo.jar ..." to get it to work.

Sun, what are you thinking?

Maybe expecting Sun to move from the world of big servers, where expecting users to write a shell script is perfectly acceptable, to the world of desktops, where users should be able to do everything just by clicking in an obvious place and without having to understand the difference between an ELF file and a JAR, is too much to ask.

An authentic Java desktop would be, in my opinion, one in which all the work gets done in Java. That means a Java office suite, a Java window manager, a Java file explorer. This is completely doable, and Java is a fantastic environment for doing those things (I know, you will flame me saying Java sucks, Java is slow, etc, sorry, that isn't true anymore). I would love to see such a desktop environment, and it would have fantastic security and portability advantages. A real Java-based OS is the only thing that has a real chance of competing with Linux, I believe (ok, I will get majorly flamed for that, but it's true).

I think that if Sun is serious about this, the way forward is:

• Partner up with Suse/Novell. They are going to win in the desktop by producing a real-world desktop distro. In fact I'm using it right now and it's great.
• Open-source Java, or give enough assistance to existing OS java projects such as Kaffe and GNU Classpath to make them viable real-world usable Java implementations. Sun thinks this is irrelevant; it's not. Getting something truly open source is a key step to making something ubiquitous.
• Develop some real-world Java apps. As someone else on /. said, J2ee is becoming the Cobol of our age. That is sad because Java could be so much more than a server system. How about developing a word processor and spreadsheet in Java? By doing this, they would give people a reason to use Java, and they would also really find out what the limitations and flaws of Swing are, and maybe they would fix them.

Ok, that's enough ranting, sure to stir up many heated flames about how much Java sucks, and Scott hasn't called me anytime recently to ask for business advice, so I'll leave off here.

First off, GCJ and GNU Classpath are in the process of being merged.

Second, you missed an important alternative JVM: Kaffe!

Kaffe is a GPL'd clean room implementation of Sun's java spec.

Is there a good Free implementation of Java? I've been looking at the Kaffe project.

neither Java nor Flash are Open Source and as such I don't care to learn them unless I specifically get paid for it.

You see, while Microsoft clearly doesn't own ECMA C#, Sun owns the Java platform and large chunks of its implementation, with no free alternatives.

No free alternatives? Who is spreading FUD now?
http://www.kaffe.org/
http://www.japhar.org/
http://www.blackdown.org/java-linux.html
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/classpath.ht ml
http://gcc.gnu.org/java/

Sure, a lot of these projects are far behind the official Java in version and capabilities today, but if Sun would suddenly change the licensing or start to charge people for using Java, there are a huge amount of companies (IBM, Oracle, BEA...) with too much invested in Java, and a huge number of experienced Java programmers. Don't you think they would sponsor these projects to quickly get a viable open source alternative up and running?

If we want an open source Java, I think the right thing to pursue is Kaffe, gcj, and Gnu CLASSPATH. I would love it if Sun did open source Java and such an action may be the best way to ensure Java's long-term survival, but somehow I have a feeling that Scott and the Sun lawyers won't have the guts or the will to take the risks and do this.

--------
Create a WAP server

You know what's even worse? Slashdot rejects funny submissions. Here's the text of my submission that got rejected twice(!):


In one of the oddest moves yet, Guillaume Desnoix (head of the JDistro project) has ported the open source Kaffe Java Virtual Machine to his Apple ][c. When asked why he did it, he said, "The main reason was to fasten my programming daily work. I felt a little limited by the 6502 instructions and wanted to enjoy the highlevel bytecode of Java." Read the full scoop over at JavaLobby.

Well, since there already is an open-source VM out there, have you tried porting it to your platform of choice? No? Wouldn't that hold for Sun's implementation too if that was released OSS? There won't be any ports if noone does the porting.

Then gidds (56397) responded: Wy do you believe this? I see no reason to, and many reasons not to.

At present, Java's platform-neutrality is pretty good; better than almost anything else. Not just the handful of mainstream desktop OSs, but all sorts of other niche platforms, from phones to mainframes. And it's not just that something runs, but that the platforms are similar enough that software can run on them all. Unchanged.

Simply put, FOSS supporters believe this because it's already been done at least twice. If you have a Java application that uses the J2SE APIs (and none of the "sun.com" APIs), then chances are really medium-to-high that both Kaffe and SableVM can run your app. If they can't, it's because FOSS developers are still working on implementing the entirety of Sun's API set (a moving target) in a cleanroom setting.

Give FOSS developers enough time, and they'll complete their *own* Open Source implementation of the Java standards. They won't be able to use the trademark "Java", but they'll be WORA-compatable (except for bugs in Sun's implementation). They're asking Sun to open up Java just so they can speed the development, gain access to the trademark, and stay current with the lastest API releases.

The irony is that Sun's biggest stated worry about opening the source is breaking WORA through forks.

The truth is that FOSS developers are actively working on a fork because Sun won't open the source, and WORA remains an elusive goal that is never achieved because Sun keeps shifting the API target, and Sun's implementations of the APIs are all buggy. If Sun were to stabalize their APIs and open their source (and only allow use of the "Java" trademark to apps that pass their open source compatability toolkit), then the distributed power of FOSS could kick in, wipe out the bugs, and provide true WORA.

Is it some kind of private fork of GCJ? Or does it work like Kaffe?
I'm confused.

I guess you could reverse-engineer kissme or SableVM, if you had to... but why bother making or using a proprietary JVM, when there are so many good (and improving!) free ones?

you do not distribute additional software intended to supersede any component(s) of the Redistributables

...no Open-Source SUN Java.

People being impatient have already generated GCJ and Kaffe working on open-source implementations of Java. Neither are yet as complete as the 'full' Java, but are in progress.

Is there a 'standard' for the Java language itself, in the same way that there is for "C#"? If not, could it be because Sun doesn't want to make it easier for Open-Source folks to create a complete implementation?...

The other thing is that you don't have to be Sun to open source java! Anyone can do it.

In fact - several people are.

Leave Sun alone. If you want it open source then go code it your self or join the people who are.

Will.

There is already an open source java compiler (...) It does not support awt or Swing yet. This should be the obvious starting point for IBM

Kaffe supports AWT and limited portions of Swing. And it works great.

Oh, and there's this Jikes stuff, written by a little company called, well, IBM. Yes, it's free and libre. If Sun collaborate with IBM towards an open source Java, this will be the implementation they will use - not Sun's, and certainly not gcj !

GCJ is a great project but it's still pretty much that - a project. Kaffe is usable, Jikes is production-stable.

Thomas Miconi

I know this is about Sun's sources itself being opened, but what about Kaffe?

Let me get this straight: is this an attempt to get Sun to cooperate on creating an open source Java implementation? I don't see any mention of opening up specifications, or even the to-be-developed implementation becoming the reference implementation.

If so, what's all the fuss about? We already have several efforts underway that implement Java as OSS. Why does'n IBM join them?

Not true - GNU Classpath is JDK1.4 compatible in many areas, and pretty much complete at JDK1.2 level with the sole exception of CORBA (which has interesting license issues) and Swing, which is being actively worked on (there's a screenshot of Classpath running a Swing demo that's limited to buttons and checkboxes, and it actually works!).

Sure, cloning Swing and many of the other massive libraries in recent JDK versions is a mammoth undertaking and life would be a great deal easier for everyone if Sun would open up the reference implementation. But don't discount the work of the people who are already doing it - they're further along than you think!

(BTW, the reason those URLs point to kaffe.org is just because my own domain for them expired; kaffe.org graciously agreed to host the files, but the results are independently generated and not biased in favor or against any of kaffe's "competitors". Having said that, Kaffe is another project that's made leaps and bounds recently. There are, in fact, multiple completely Free/Open Source implementations of Java now that can run many high-profile Java apps, including Eclipse and Tomcat)

Not true - GNU Classpath is JDK1.4 compatible in many areas, and pretty much complete at JDK1.2 level with the sole exception of CORBA (which has interesting license issues) and Swing, which is being actively worked on (there's a screenshot of Classpath running a Swing demo that's limited to buttons and checkboxes, and it actually works!).

Sure, cloning Swing and many of the other massive libraries in recent JDK versions is a mammoth undertaking and life would be a great deal easier for everyone if Sun would open up the reference implementation. But don't discount the work of the people who are already doing it - they're further along than you think!

(BTW, the reason those URLs point to kaffe.org is just because my own domain for them expired; kaffe.org graciously agreed to host the files, but the results are independently generated and not biased in favor or against any of kaffe's "competitors". Having said that, Kaffe is another project that's made leaps and bounds recently. There are, in fact, multiple completely Free/Open Source implementations of Java now that can run many high-profile Java apps, including Eclipse and Tomcat)

If they dual license it, then they get to retain complete control over the commercial fork of it. Sun would be unique in that no other entity would have the rights that Sun does to use Java other than under the GPL.

I think that would keep Sun pretty firmly in the driver's seat.

If IBM is serious about this and Sun refuses to play ball, then I'd be surprised if IBM didn't suddenly decide to champion the Kaffe project or perhaps even start their own open Java system.

IBM, being, well, IBM, will have an open Java one way or another, if that's really what they want.

What about the already existing Open Source Java implimentations?

GNU Compiler for Java is available from the FSF. There is also work to make a Mozilla plugin for using GCJ to allow Java Applets to run.

Kaffe PersonalJava 1.1 compliant Java.

Kaffe once shipped with RedHat. GCJ currently ships with most major linux distributions right now.