Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FreeBSD Foundation Announces Java License for Free

Posted by timothy on from the nice-hot-cuppa-java dept.

nt2UNIX writes: "There is an article on Daily Daemon News that the FreeBSD Foundation has announced the inclusion of a FreeBSD native SUN Java SDK and RunTime Environment for the January 2002 release of FreeBSD 4.5 The whole announcement can be found here."

137 comments

  1. More reason to take *NIX over Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft drops Java support, FreeBSD adds the SDK. I love it!

    --
    Chris Lambert

    1. Re:More reason to take *NIX over Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that Microsoft supports both Java and J#. Nice try, though.

  2. WOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The FreeBSD Foundation relies solely on contributions from individuals and businesses to fund its activities. In negotiating the JDK/JRE license, where both parties were in almost immediate agreement to the license terms, the Foundation still spent in excess of $3000 on legal fees. Highly qualified and experienced legal counsel is the expensive yet necessary cost of protecting the best interests of the FreeBSD Project.

  3. Too bad the licensing blew it by freebsd+guy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As a former FreeBSD committer, I worked extensively with the team that produced the JRE/JDK project. Since programming languages can only be protected by patents (not copyrights), our original intention was to craft a clean-room version of Java that we could release under the BSD license, just like everything else in our distribution. Unfortunately, manpower was tight, and we were not able to do it all on our own. Hence, we discussed the matter with Sun and (IMHO) compromised our principles (unrestricted distribution in source and binary forms) in order to get the project done.

    Our experience should serve as an important lesson to open source developers who try to tackle too large a project by themselves: do not sell your soul to Corporate America. Sure, we have a native JRE/JDK, but the only advantage is that it is native - not Free in any stretch of the imagination. (Not even restricted-Free, e.g. GPL).

    All that aside, I have been testing several snapshots of the Java tools and they are very responsive and stable. More so, I am afraid, than Blackdown - although the ultimate test will be to see how it compares with the JRE running on a Solaris/SPARC machine.

    freebsd guy

    1. Re:Too bad the licensing blew it by Metrol · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hence, we discussed the matter with Sun and (IMHO) compromised our principles (unrestricted distribution in source and binary forms) in order to get the project done.

      Certainly a fully open and free version of Java would have been preferrable and all. Even still, is this really that much different then having the Netscape 4.x browser included? For years this has gone along with both Linux and FreeBSD to provide what the community couldn't, a functioning browser.

      Just because Netscape provided a browser didn't mean that work wasn't done to produce a more open product. The folks over at KDE stepped up to the plate and knocked one outta the park with Konqueror. And of course we now have Mozilla going pretty nicely. Two great apps displacing the closed source version that preceded it.

      All I'm getting at here is that Sun need not displace any and all efforts that might look to go into a JVM for FreeBSD. Maybe it fills the role needed for a couple of years until interest in doing a fresh version as you described gets enough going to actually make it happen.

      --
      The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
    2. Re:Too bad the licensing blew it by Rogain · · Score: 1

      On my UltraSparcII300's the sun JRE sucks-ass.

      --
      The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
    3. Re:Too bad the licensing blew it by philg · · Score: 2

      "Certainly a fully open and free version of Java would have been preferrable and all. Even still, is this really that much different then having the Netscape 4.x browser included? For years this has gone along with both Linux and FreeBSD to provide what the community couldn't, a functioning browser."

      Unfortunately, yes, it is a bigger deal than Netscape, because Java, unlike Netscape, is used to build other applications. Should the licensing change or Java should go away, a host of other apps go with it.

      As a Java developer, I'm very impressed with the language, and have so far been pretty happy with Sun's performance as a steward. But I would like it if the language and libraries had a cleanroom-free implementation. Hopefully, though, you'll be right and Kaffe and GNU Classpath (or something) will eventually bring a stable, up-to-date, Free Java.

      phil

    4. Re:Too bad the licensing blew it by mvw · · Score: 2
      As a former FreeBSD committer, I worked extensively with the team that produced the JRE/JDK project. Since programming languages can only be protected by patents (not copyrights), our original intention was to craft a clean-room version of Java that we could release under the BSD license, just like everything else in our distribution.

      But Java isn't just a programming language. When we talk about Java, this includes a decent VM, the huge libraries plus a couple of tools that need to be provided.

      The naked Java isn't very attractive. It would look similiar to what the GCC java offers.

      Alone implementing the standard libs, plus AWT and SWING from scratch would have been a huge task.

      Ok, now there will be "blessed" version of Java, will this hinder any effort to create a 100% free version (any legal hook in the Sun community license?).

      Regards,
      Marc

  4. This is nice by metlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since Microsoft is slowly trying to push third party development applications away from it's platform (apparently to make way for .NET), this is a good sign.

    I'm not a big fan of Java, but if there are enough number of viable platforms for development, I'm sure attention could be shifted from the Win* platform to other unices.

    FreeBSD is a very stable and robust platform, but to what extent has it managed to penetrate the existing MS market? Apparently Linux seems to be doing this, and the reason is not anything else, except support for existing applications.

    I'd like to see where this takes the FreeBSD marketshare.

    1. Re:This is nice by Stary · · Score: 1
      I'm sure attention could be shifted from the Win* platform to other unices.

      Win* == Unix? Wow, how misinformed can you be...?

      --
      Tomorrow will be cancelled due to lack of interest
    2. Re:This is nice by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      Other unices.
      Other than Solaris, (also by Sun).
      ... shifted from the Win* platform to other (non-Solaris) unices.

      He threw you a curve. You missed.

  5. Java license for Free (as in ???) by GGardner · · Score: 4, Informative
    Well, it isn't free as in speech, cause we don't get source code, which means it is x86 only (amoung other issues).


    And the FreeBSD team had to pay $3k in legal fees to lawyers to wrangle licensing terms, so it is hardly free as in beer.

    1. Re:Java license for Free (as in ???) by metlin · · Score: 2

      Very true. But the good news is that we are making some leeway into getting stuff ported our way, from companies that are pretty stubborn (if you do not know what I mean, go read the Sun Java (TM) License).

      "...With an officially licensed binary Java distribution..."

      Well, this does necessarily mean the end of a few license wars for running Java (TM) on FreeBSD, but atleast a native port has been done and something _is_ better than nothing. Not that ppl are going to begin using Java on FreeBSD tomorrow, but it definitely is a first step.

    2. Re:Java license for Free (as in ???) by Zillatron · · Score: 3, Funny
      Well, it isn't free as in speech, cause we don't get source code, which means it is x86 only (amoung other issues).

      It's O.K. for it to run on x86 only. The focus of FreeBSD is to run as well as possible on x86 machines. If you want to run on other architectures, try NetBSD whose motto is ``Of course it runs NetBSD.''

      --
      Hey!!! the parentheses are good for something
    3. Re:Java license for Free (as in ???) by Derkec · · Score: 3, Insightful
      And the FreeBSD team had to pay $3k in legal fees to lawyers to wrangle licensing terms, so it is hardly free as in beer.


      Um.. Nobody held a gun to their head and made them hire lawyers. Sun, who built and owns the IP, graciously let them use it Free as in Beer. While I know everyone who codes should give away all their source out of the kindness of their hearts, the for slimy corportate types the folks at Sun are being pretty decent towards a group improving a competing Unix OS.

    4. Re:Java license for Free (as in ???) by RLiegh · · Score: 1

      In the last year or whatever, FreeBSD has been working on an Alpha port, also.
      Loosely speaking, you could also say mac too (if you count Darwin, which has FreeBSD in it...though it's Mach, so neverfuckingmind).

    5. Re:Java license for Free (as in ???) by jslag · · Score: 1
      the folks at Sun are being pretty decent towards a group improving a competing Unix OS.


      Competing with Sun's business? I didn't know that FreeBSD was producing big-$$$ server hardware.

  6. This is huge by astrashe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I love it -- the lack of solid java support is the biggest problem I have with FreeBSD.

    Now if only the same thing would happen with OpenBSD -- we could write tomcat based web apps, and wouldn't have to worry so much about being hacked.

    1. Re:This is huge by wysoft · · Score: 1

      Now if only the same thing would happen with OpenBSD

      There's a good chance the FreeBSD binaries of these two software packages will work under OpenBSD (and NetBSD's) FreeBSD emulation. Give it a try!

      --
      -- I'll cut you up so bad, you'll wish I'd never cut you up so bad!
    2. Re:This is huge by m_ilya · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now if only the same thing would happen with OpenBSD -- we could write tomcat based web apps, and wouldn't have to worry so much about being hacked.

      OpenBSD is not a silver bullet. It just comes with more sane defaults and its core have seen more audits probably. It doesn't magically protect applications your wrote and it doesn't protect applications installed from ports from hacks. Your code still have to be audited for bugs and your admin still have to patch installed applications if they show up on bugtraq.

      --

      --
      Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)

    3. Re:This is huge by Andreas+Rueckert · · Score: 1

      It seems, there are already some people running Orp+Classpath with serious apps. Unfortunately no usable GUI classes yet, but the potential is there.

  7. This means... by mlinksva · · Score: 2
    ... that a FreeBSD CD can legally include a port of Sun's JDK/JRE? I suppose this saves users the trouble of downloading, but a script could have automated that. So it's a big win if you have a FreeBSD box that's not on the net. Is this supposed to be a big deal?

    Sun ought to be paying FreeBSD to include Java. Well, they really ought to make Java free as in free speech.

    I won't be surprised if in a couple years a truly free .net implementation has surpassed java on free *nix systems due to Sun squandering its ~5 year headstart.

  8. A day late and a dollar short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Java? Sorry, the parade's gone by.

    1. Re:A day late and a dollar short by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have no idea what you are talking about.

  9. Who's ahead now?? by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    FreeBSD will have a native Java. FreeBSD will also have a native port of C# tools through Corel. Linux will have to wait for Ximian to code up Mono. Looks like its linux playing catch-up now. Oh wait, they linux has real databases. Forget I said any of this.

    1. Re:Who's ahead now?? by ZxCv · · Score: 2

      FreeBSD will have a native port of C# tools through Corel? How's that? Linkage?

      --

      Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
    2. Re:Who's ahead now?? by efgbr · · Score: 1

      JRE/JDK has been available for some GNU/Linux distributions for a while, and some distributions ship it already (like Conectiva and Slackware).

      Corel's .NET implementation won't be free. That is, only FreeBSD users will be able to choose to be controlled by a Microsoft division. If you value your freedom, you should wait for Mono or Portable.NET, both of which will run on FreeBSD.

      - Evandro

    3. Re:Who's ahead now?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And knowing Corel's track record on software development, It will be as buggy as tropical rainforest that has had bug pheromone sprayed on it.

    4. Re:Who's ahead now?? by Arandir · · Score: 2

      If you value your freedom...

      My freedom means I can choose open or proprietary software. My freedom is meaningless without choice.

      Using the Sun JRE/JDK may mean lesser utility than an unavailable Mono or Portable.NET, but it is still utility. It doesn't *remove* any of my freedom. Although it doesn't add any, it does add utility. Overall it's a net win. If Mono were available, and it ran Java applications, then I would probably choose it because I get added utility *and* freedom. But as long as the Sun JRE/JDK doesn't take away any freedom I currently possess, I am still just as free using it as I would be not using either product.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  10. Ah yes, but the important question is ... by J.D.+Hogg · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    ... will FreeBSD ever offer C# ? C# is way better than Java, which is not the language of the future : I read it here, it must be true.

    .((_? ( . . .
    . .{{ . _ . . Care for
    .\==}==/_) . .Some Java
    &lt_\===/__; .. with you FreeBSD ?
    . ''''' . . .

    1. Re:Ah yes, but the important question is ... by efgbr · · Score: 1

      Mono and Portable.NET will work on FreeBSD. And, unlike Jave, it's free software.

    2. Re:Ah yes, but the important question is ... by ozzmosis · · Score: 1

      i put pnet in the ports tree.

      So, yes.

  11. c'mon, all the cool kids are doing it. by footility · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm sending $10 to the foundation. 299 more of
    the same donation, and they'll have the lawyers
    paid. Come on, it's only $10 bucks -- just skip
    that ${quantity_of_cold_beverage} next weekend ;-)

    If you can afford more... The foundation /is/ a
    501(c)(3) non-profit, so you could get a bit of
    a tax credit on your donation if it is postmarked
    before 31 Dec 2001.

    for full details see: http://freebsdfoundation.org/

    --
    What f*ing box!?!?
  12. Hm... don't know. by burtonator · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am a big fan of Java. I think my accomplishments speak for themselves. I have done a lot of work under Jakarta and founded two of its core projects.

    That said. I am very upset at what SUN has done to systematically *destroy* Java's potential.

    In 1995 everything was great, Java was going to change the world.

    Then they decided to play games, they pulled out of the standards committees and now there will be no ECMA or IEEE standard for Java.

    Not only that but they have shown that they have NO interest in EVER Open Sourcing Java.

    Every new Java specification is dumped into the JVM as proprietary code.

    I mean I can understand that Open Sourcing a large proprietary product like Java can be hard. Good examples are the Mozilla and Tomcat projects. Proptietary products can end up using libraries that you don't have the license too. Not only that but you have to get sign off from all the morons that think proprietary is the only way to go.

    But SUN *continues* to dump code into the proprietary JVM making it bigger and more bloated than ever before.

    In case Some of you don't know, SUNs MO for extending the VM is to work on a dedicated sub-project outside of the VM and then getting it targeted for the next revision.

    So for example JSSE (Java Secure Socket Extension). This is a external library that can just be plugged into any VM. Instead of releasing this as an external project that has different licensing they just dump it into JDK 1.4 with the same old stupid non-OSS license.

    THIS IS NOT THE WAY TO DO IT SUN!

    I think it is great that FreeBSD can now distribute the JDK.

    It just seems too little too late for me.

    Java has real competition now. They are not the ONLY game on the block.

    Python and C# are going to give you a REAL run for your money SUN.

    So, they way I see it, you have two options:

    1. Loose. C# is an IEEE standard as well as the CLR. When mono is successful no one is going to want to use your proprietary JVM anymore.

    2. *WIN* Open Source license the JVM. Yes... I know it is scarry but this is you ONLY choice. Java still has a lot of great momentum. (*cough* Jakarta *cough*)

    Clearly you aren't interested in the standards process, this is fine. I can't blame you. Standards are not a panacea! Nice to have but not really a requirement.

    So just BSD license it and be over with it. MS isn't going to steal it! They aren't interested in Java anymore.

    What? Aren't going to Open Source Java?

    Fine. I am just going to use C#.

    Sorry if this seemed like a troll. I am just sick of these stupid games :(

    I just want to change the world. Is that so bad :)

    1. Re:Hm... don't know. by markj02 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      C# is an IEEE standard as well as the CLR. When mono is successful no one is going to want to use your proprietary JVM anymore.

      Well, first of all, AFAIK, C# is an ECMA standard, not IEEE. Now, I don't get your complaint. You say that there is a problem with Sun "dumping proprietary libraries" into the Java spec. But the Java language, JVM, and core libraries are as-well specified as C#/CLR, and they are stable. Beyond the core ECMA specs, Microsoft is completely proprietary, with NO free implementation at all and NO decent specs. And there is no guarantee that Microsoft will even stick to their spec--they will likely extend the hell out of what they submitted as a standard. Sun at least writes pretty good specs for what goes into new releases of the Java platform and they give you a free implementation.

      When mono is successful no one is going to want to use your proprietary JVM anymore.

      Why would anybody care about Mono? It's going to use non-standard APIs on a little-used platform.

      2. *WIN* Open Source license the JVM. Yes... I know it is scarry but this is you ONLY choice. Java still has a lot of great momentum. (*cough* Jakarta *cough*)

      That makes no sense either. Why do you care about open sourcing Sun's JDK? Implementing C#/CLR as part of Mono is at least as hard as implementing Java/JVM. Yet, you seem convinced that Mono will be successful. Well, if the Mono people can hack up C#/CLR, why does it matter whether Sun open sources Java/JVM? Why can't someone else just implement a high-performance Java/JVM? And what has Microsoft done for the open source community later? Ever?

      Sun makes available a great implementation under usable license terms. If you want something open source, rather than whining and stomping your foot that they aren't giving you more, go implement your own. Sun has already given you more than Microsoft likely ever will.

      And, in fact, the equivalent of C#/CLR/CLI already exists for Java in open source form in the form of several open source Java compilers, the Intel ORP, and open source libraries. If that functionality is what you or the Mono project are after, you could have had that years ago.

    2. Re:Hm... don't know. by informer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, first of all, AFAIK, C# is an ECMA standard, not IEEE. Now, I don't get your complaint. You say that there is a problem with Sun "dumping proprietary libraries" into the Java spec. But the Java language, JVM, and core libraries are as-well specified as C#/CLR, and they are stable.

      This is a good point, however going to the trouble of standardizing the various components of .NET implies a comitment to sticking with those standards.


      Beyond the core ECMA specs, Microsoft is completely proprietary, with NO free implementation at all and NO decent specs. And there is no guarantee that Microsoft will even stick to their spec--they will likely extend the hell out of what they submitted as a standard.

      I agree that these are mostly advantages for Java however its not very likely that microsoft will break compatability with the spec as far as breaking applications that are complied for, and conform to it. To be fair, the microsoft .NET implementation has not even been released yet, but its clear that the ECMA documents are for the most part workable.

      Why would anybody care about Mono? It's going to use non-standard APIs on a little-used platform.

      Little-used platform (.NET?)? This wont be true for much longer. It has not even been released yet and there is a significantly large community of developers already. People (in significant numbers) WILL care about Mono if it makes porting between windows and other OSes very easy. They will care even more if Mono implements most of Microsoft's "non standard" API's. Since when did Microsoft's non-standard API's ever stop WINE from at least trying to implement anything? I guess you're saying WINE is also useless, along with support for NTFS, SMB, etc etc. The list goes on.

      --

      If a penguin dies in the woods, and nobody is around to hear it, what sound does it make?
    3. Re:Hm... don't know. by rusti999 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Make a clear distinction between specification and implementation. Sun has made the specification for Java open for all to see. JDK is an implementation of the Java platform that happens to be written at Sun. By no means this is the only way to develop and use Java. For instance, you can grab Jikes compiler, compile your Java program, and run it on Jalapeno VM. You are even allowed to write your own implementation of the compiler and the VM. One catch is, if you want your implementation to be certified as 100% Pure Java, you need to pass the Java Compatibility Kit (JCK), which you need to license from Sun.

    4. Re:Hm... don't know. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes, I will bite on this troll.

      Java is a specification. Sun aren't the only company to release a JDK or JRE - there are hundreds of different companies providing Java environments - IBM being one of them. Kaffe is a free implementation that is 'getting there' after 4 or so years of work.

      If you don't want JSSE and all that, then use a different version of the JDK. Maybe PJava, or J2EE Micro-Edition. The fact is, Java is a platform, and a modern web platform includes code for security and all of the other stuff that is included. .NET will be exactly the same, or lack features in comparison.

      Java lets you code well, quickly, and have software that will run on a wide variety of platforms without recompilation. C# brings the cleanliness of Java to C, but lacks in many areas (and adds in others, to be fair), and code will only run on CLR supporting platforms. And Sun have 5 more years experience of optimising bytecode than Microsoft.

      Yes, Java is a large download. But you only have to do it once - overnight via Modem, or 5 minutes on broadband is hardly a problem. And magazines carry Java development products on them all the time, even if they aren't the most up to date versions sometimes.

    5. Re:Hm... don't know. by macpeep · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "But SUN *continues* to dump code into the proprietary JVM making it bigger and more bloated than ever before."

      Not into the VM. Into the core API. There's a HUGE difference. Of course the two walk kinda hand in hand but that's like saying KDE and Gnome are in the Linux kernel.

      "Java has real competition now. They are not the ONLY game on the block. Python and C# are going to give you a REAL run for your money SUN."

      Umm, C# yes! Python, I don't think so!! Some other people would say Perl, but seriously, they are not in the same league if you talk about industry wide acceptance. C# and .NET will definitely give Java a run for their money though!

      I don't see how being an IEEE standard has any direct correlation with success or failure of a language though. Visual Basic is not a standard of any kind and it's one of the most used programming languages / systems out there. Java is also hugely popular and is also not a standard. JavaScript hasn't become any more or less popular after ECMA made it a standard ("ECMA script"). Or if it's more used now, it's not because web designers would go "oh! it's an ECMA standard!". The list goes on with other technologies too.. Flash (as in web animations) for example.

      "So, they way I see it, you have two options:"
      [snip]
      "2. *WIN* Open Source license the JVM. Yes... I know it is scarry but this is you ONLY choice."

      Time to wake up! Java is doing just fine and even if Sun doesn't have a totally optimal strategy with it, you're living in la-la land if you seriously think that open source licensing the JVM is Sun's "only choice" (you even spelled only in all-caps!). The community process is working fine and Java is just getting wider adoption and acceptance every day. Most new cellular phones that are going to be released in Asia and Europe during 2002 and onwards will come with a JVM built in. More and more web servers and application servers run Java.

      Open sourcing Mozilla did dick all for Netscape. Sure, it is going to produce a nice browser a year from now (five years down the road) when Mozilla completes, but as far as grabbing back market share and battling the competition, it has failed miserably. Check the logs of any major "neutral" web site and you'll see that Mozilla has completely marginal adoption. Neutral here means such sites where the main users aren't gear heads.

      "Fine. I am just going to use C#."

      I saw similar reactions when Microsoft came out with J++. People paniced, accused Sun of "destroying Java" and predicting that Java would be dead within a year, replaced by "Microsoft Java". This was around 1997 or 1998 or so.. Don't remember when exactly. Lots of people were talking about jumping ship. I guess it just goes to show that Sun and the Java developer community might have more of a clue than you think.

    6. Re:Hm... don't know. by bero-rh · · Score: 2

      I mean I can understand that Open Sourcing a large proprietary product like JHava can be hard. [...] Proprietary products can end up using libraries that you don't have the license to.

      This is not even the case for JDK, or at least wasn't 2 years ago.
      The blackdown people and various others have always had access to the source code and could build it without requiring proprietary libs, so it's just a matter of wanting vs. not wanting to open source it.

      100% agreed that they'll lose if they don't make the right decision, and make it soon.

      --
      This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
    7. Re:Hm... don't know. by toriver · · Score: 1
      Not only that but they have shown that they have NO interest in EVER Open Sourcing Java.

      Why should they? It's only ONE implementation of many, and as e.g. IBM has shown, it's not even the best. It's like demaniding that AT&T must "open-source" their C++ compiler in order for GCC to exist.

      If you want an open-source JVM and compiler suite, you are free to write them, but it's not a requirement that it must be Sun's implementation any more than any C++ compiler for Windows must be based on Microsoft Visual C++.

      Python and C# are going to give you a REAL run for your money SUN.

      Um, no. Not at all. Or do you really believe that the hundreds of large companies who write Java software are going to switch languages and lose all the mature libs that exist for Java?

      C# is an IEEE standard as well as the CLR.

      It has been SUBMITTED to the ECMA (not IEEE), but I'd like to see link to info that it actually has been APPROVED as a standard. The last spec document I saw had the entire chapter on exceptions missing, for instance.

      And it's not like it has helped Smalltalk, Ada or CLOS that they are standardized.

      Open Source license the JVM.

      Why? Why can't the OSS community (if such a thing really exists) write one from scratch, like they have for practically everything else?

      Fine. I am just going to use C#.

      You are for all practical purposes saying you're going to use Windows, then.

    8. Re:Hm... don't know. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, it is going to produce a nice browser a year from now (five years down the road) when Mozilla completes

      You couldn't have shot yourself in the head in a more spectacular way. Man, you are living in early 2000... Mozilla *has* produced a nice browser Netscape 6.2 (hell even raw mozilla is ace)... and Microsoft has shot out the legs from Sun and Java with .NET.

      You're over a year out of date pal. By the time you figure out what's really going on, you will already be living in a .NET world and Java will be even more of a joke than it already is.

    9. Re:Hm... don't know. by codingOgre · · Score: 1

      Actually WINE is useless. Name one thing that it is good for? Certainly a real waste of effort. By the time they get Win95 Win32 compat. everyone will have moved on to the newer versions of Win32. E.g. the WINE developers are going after a moving target that they can never catch up to.

      --
      Space may be the final frontier, but it's made in a Hollywood basement. --Red Hot Chili Peppers, Californication
    10. Re:Hm... don't know. by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      I learned Python and now I'm learning C#. They're both pretty damn good.

    11. Re:Hm... don't know. by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      optimised yet so slow, I keep wondering why.

    12. Re:Hm... don't know. by peter+hoffman · · Score: 3, Informative
      It has been SUBMITTED to the ECMA (not IEEE), but I'd like to see link to info that it actually has been APPROVED as a standard. The last spec document I saw had the entire chapter on exceptions missing, for instance.

      The difference between submitted and approved is an important point so I checked for the current status at ECMA where the NEWS link on the front page led to this:

      Assembly met in Montreux on 112the December 2001, and approved 33 revised and 7 new Standards. Among the new Standards, the files of Standard ECMA-334, C# Language Specification, and Standard ECMA-335, Common Language Infrastructure (CLI), are already available in this web site and can be freely downloaded.

      An ECMA TR, ECMA TR/84, related to Standard ECMA-335, has also been approved and can be found here.

    13. Re:Hm... don't know. by Bert690 · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. I tried Mozilla and Netscape 6.2 last week, hoping they would at last provide me an alternative to Netscape 4 or IE. Unfortunately within a few minutes of use it was apparent that they still suck -- bugs everywhere and SLOW as hell. I also tried K-Meleon, the only one I actually left installed. Unfortunately it's also pretty buggy and lacks many important features.

    14. Re:Hm... don't know. by Bert690 · · Score: 1

      Slow comapared to what? C / C++? Sure.

      Far faster (3-4x) than Perl & Python though, at least for the server-side tasks for which I've conducted formal comparisons.

    15. Re:Hm... don't know. by WildBeast · · Score: 1

      I've only tried client-side Java apps and they were slow. For the server-side, the speed may be good i wouldn't know, never tried.

    16. Re:Hm... don't know. by markj02 · · Score: 1
      "Why would anybody care about Mono? It's going to use non-standard APIs on a little-used platform."
      Little-used platform (.NET?)? This wont be true for much longer.

      Mono will not implement .NET--it can't, because there won't be anything like a complete spec for .NET. The Mono authors have already said that they really just care about implementing something that is kind of like .NET, not something that is fully compatible.

      Since when did Microsoft's non-standard API's ever stop WINE from at least trying to implement anything? I guess you're saying WINE is also useless, along with support for NTFS, SMB, etc etc. The list goes on.

      Wine is largely useless: it runs few programs, and almost none of them reliably enough for daily use. Even IBM (with a lot more resources) didn't manage to create a Windows compatible system that was sufficiently useful to catch on. Linux support for NTFS was a herculean effort of reverse engineering, took years to do, and still isn't recommended for writing. SMB is only well documented because it didn't come from Microsoft originally, and Microsoft has been trying to break it ever since (viz their password shenanigans). Yes, the list goes on, and it shows how Microsoft has been trying to use proprietary standards to maintain a monopoly and keep compatible implementations from springing up.

    17. Re:Hm... don't know. by thedarkstorm · · Score: 1

      Instead of complaining about opensource this opensource that. Why don't you explain how open-sourcing Java will make it beat C# and the .NET momentum by simply having it as open-source? If it was standardized, yes I can see that, but simply openening it's source for the JVM? Don't think so. I see no benefit here.

      --
      ... hey ... I had a .sig, bu then MicroSo$$ embraced it...
  13. Java on NetBSD and OpenBSD by wysoft · · Score: 1

    Cool, now this means that NetBSD and OpenBSD can use the Sun JDK and runtimes :) I love the binary emulation.

    --
    -- I'll cut you up so bad, you'll wish I'd never cut you up so bad!
    1. Re:Java on NetBSD and OpenBSD by T-Punkt · · Score: 1

      Actually this means that now you have the choice between running the Sun JDK for Linux with binary emulation/simulation or running the Sun JDK for FreeBSD with binary emulation/simulation....

    2. Re:Java on NetBSD and OpenBSD by flynn_nrg · · Score: 1

      I've been running Linux' jdk on OpenBSD for a while, nothing new really.

  14. C# for Freebsd from Microsoft! by bob1000 · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.microsoft.com/partner/products/microsof tnet/SharedSourceCsharpCLIFAQ.asp

    Couldn't believe it myself. Guess they are just trying to stick it to linux with that "[Freebsd] has historically encouraged unencumbered experimentation" comment.

    1. Re:C# for Freebsd from Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Work for *BSD projects and you'll never have that filthy scumbag Richard M. Stallman demand that you add "GNU" to the front of the project's name. Work on Linux-related or other GPL'd projects and you can expect to get that on a daily bases. Refuse and you'll be expected to "kiss the ring" of Stallman before you're ever back in the good graces of the community. Basically, Linux is about as far from freedom as it gets.

    2. Re:C# for Freebsd from Microsoft! by pivo · · Score: 1

      Don't be fooled by it existing for FreeBSD (or any other platform.) It may exist, but it'll never work as well as on their native platform, and it'll never be supported well either.

    3. Re:C# for Freebsd from Microsoft! by kerch · · Score: 1

      Maybe MS is targeting FreeBSD (and only FreeBSD) because it still powers Hotmail?

    4. Re:C# for Freebsd from Microsoft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More likely it is because windows has been shipping with code borrowed from FreeBSD for as long as I can remember. The BSD License makes it pretty easy to do. Apple was able to build an OS on top or BSD licensed code.

      Microsoft prefers FreeBSD because the minute FreeBSD does something better they can use the code. In that sense FreeBSD is not a 'threat' to Microsoft. It also allows them to try to drive fractures through 'free' software communities.

      However there is a real need for a license like GPL. In the past unprotected 'free' software has been snapped up through legal proceedings. GPL code is protected from this. BSD license doesn't provide any substantial protection against being sued out of existance, but as long as there is a choice between the two people threatining BSD licensed code could face the nasty suprize of finding that they've forced the code developer to switch to the GPL.
      In an ideal world no one would try to patent or copyright code they 'borrowed' from a BSD license code base. Since this isn't an ideal world both licenses have places where the one is preferable to the other.

  15. kaffe licensing by sebol · · Score: 1

    Kaffe was originally BSD license, then gpled. is that anything to do with this?
    and i'm wonder why kaffe latest released was on 2000

    --
    -- Hasbullah bin Pit (sebol)
    1. Re:kaffe licensing by toriver · · Score: 1
      and i'm wonder why kaffe latest released was on 2000

      Because the only person who cared for the project went to work for Instantiations.

  16. Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do we really need a crappy, proprietary, incomplete, slow and stupid language?

    NO!

    JAVA SUX AND MUST BE BURIED!

    1. Re:Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by bsletten · · Score: 1, Troll

      Tell the wardens to take away your posting privilege freak boy. Oh yeah, up the thorazine.

    2. Re:Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well maybe it's a stupid language if you're a VB programmer!

    3. Re:Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No I'm not a VB programmer. I'm an asm programmer.

    4. Re:Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then you should appreciate the fact that you can learn and use java assembly directly for the VM without learning the language.

    5. Re:Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by Free+Bird · · Score: 1

      Java assembly != assembly
      VM != Hardware

      There is no point in using Java assembly, because it isn't more efficient, because using a VM isn't efficient, because the entire concept of a VM isn't efficient, and contradict with the whole idea of assembly. I use asm because it's efficient, not because I think it's 31337 or something.

    6. Re:Great... (NOT! JAVA MUST BE DESTROYED!) by Arandir · · Score: 2

      If no one used Java, then you would be right. But you are wrong because Java is everywhere. It doesn't matter how obsolete or crappy you think it is, so long as other people disagree.

      FreeBSD is the Premier webserving platform. Without Java it's a hardsell to people needing webservers. Without Java a lot of them will stick with inferior W2K. FreeBSD is the number one choice for ISPs. Without Java it's a hardsell for the ISPs to promote their services.

      If you don't want to use Java, no one is forcing you. Don't install it. Don't offer it for your customers. Tell all your customers using Windows that they aren't welcome on your servers. While you're at it, go dig a hole, move in, and rest comfortably in your intranet for one. The rest of us have things to do so get out of the way.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  17. This is not huge by mrbnsn · · Score: 1
    There is still no support under FreeBSD for Hotspot, Hotspot client, or Hotspot server.

    If you want to actually deploy services (e.g. JBoss), or run desktop apps (e.g. NetBeans), stick to Linux.

  18. Re:Jalepeno/Jikes RVM no good for most... (yet?) by Frogg · · Score: 2, Informative
    It's quite likely that most real world Java programs won't run on Jalepeno (aka: Jikes RVM) -- according to the Jikes RVM Q&A Overview

    [...] The Jikes RVM is inadequate for programmers who need a complete Java platform, since it has incomplete functionality. The Jikes RVM does not support many libraries (e.g., AWT, Swing, J2EE), user-defined class loaders, security manager, bytecode verification, and many other features that need to be present in a production virtual machine.

    [...] The Jikes RVM does not provide a complete platform that conforms to the Java Virtual Machine specification.

    [...] It was not written to be a complete Java VM.

    Whilst it would be possible to bring Jalepeno up to these standards of functionality with a team of open source programmers, in reality it was never designed to be a complete JVM (it's a research 'toy') - the work involved to make these changes would not be trivial.

    That said, it is open sourced, and as the old addage goes "where there's a will there's a way".... so perhaps Jalepeno will (eventually) become a full spec JVM?

  19. Now, Netscape don`t have a excuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a good news for every FreeBSD User. Now, I think Netscape would not have "Any" Excuse for make a version of their browser (Netscape 6) on this platform. Also Opera should do the same. There are not so many browsers on FreeBSD and with a JDK 1.2, 1.3 or even 1.4 would be better for those companies who want to develop a Browser on FreeBSD. I would like to find a Opera/Netscape 6 on FreeBSD.

    1. Re:Now, Netscape don`t have a excuse. by thedarkstorm · · Score: 1

      Ummm... Opera isn't written in Java. They don't have an excuse.. they just don't want to do it. Because it needs to run java applets? not an excuse...

      --
      ... hey ... I had a .sig, bu then MicroSo$$ embraced it...