Slashdot Mirror


FreeBSD/Java Native Port Hits Beta

drdink writes "The long awaited FreeBSD/Java port has hit beta. The port was committed yesterday afternoon by Alexey Zelkin. 'This is complete and close to production quality native JDK with both working client and server native JVMs. Local micro benchmarks shown very little difference between Linux and FreeBSD JVMs in speed.' And more importantly, 'we are very close to passing of Sun TCK tests. Currently about 20 of >27000 tests are known to be broken (tests were run at -STABLE).'"

55 comments

  1. First! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Two for two.

    Post.

  2. Great! by Hellraisr · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now maybe Sun can port this to their Solaris platform..

    1. Re:Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How about Sun actually delivers on the 'Java everywhere' advertising slogan and actually puts forth the effort to ship Java for the BSD's, just like they do for Windows, Linux etc?

    2. Re:Great! by bsd_usr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's what I'm saying!!!! They're run everywhere slogan is completely misleading! Java doesn't run everywhere, as it should.

      I can understand it's not Sun's job to port it to every platform out there, but they could at least make it easier. Although, if they really do want Java to dominate then they should port it to every platform out there.

      Once Java does run everywhere, then they can sell tools and software and not care where you run it and make money that way. Seems like the only people making money off Java these days is IBM, but they got the money and muscle to implement their own compilers and virtual machine.

      Any way, I'd like to see Java on the BSD's one day soon.

    3. Re:Great! by Golthar · · Score: 1

      Actually, we are making a decent sum on Java as well.
      Its not just IBM.
      Well perhaps they make money on Java itself, but making Java products is profitable.

  3. Open Source Solaris! by mnmn · · Score: 2, Interesting


    SunOS was originally taken from BSD if I'm correct. Adding Java to FreeBSD, and porting over maybe jboss would be a boost to the FreeBSD platform. BSD stability, java portability, opensource security, makes for a unique combination, and I'm sure some smart IT directors or consultants would recommend it for critical operations. But first, Java on BSD should be stabilized and left out in the sun to mature.

    --
    "Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
    1. Re:Open Source Solaris! by LizardKing · · Score: 5, Informative

      SunOS was originally taken from BSD if I'm correct

      The original SunOS yes, but the modern day Solaris SunOS is actually SVR4 based. Sun have made a lot of changes to their original SVR4 codebase over the years, adding amongst other things, a lot of the best bits from the BSD SunOS.

      Chris

    2. Re:Open Source Solaris! by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 3, Informative

      Minor quibble: SVR4 itself is an amalgam of SYS5 and BSD. Sun didn't didn't mix them totally on their own, it's part of SVR4.

      But since Sun was trying to transition people to new Solaris 2 (SVR4), they did go above and beyond what the SVR4 spec says, including a porting and analysis kit (search your scripts for BSD commands, substitute SVR4 equivs, I think they checked flags somewhat as well) which was good, but also foisted the horror that is /usr/ucb/cc. Sun also added bits to BSD when SUnOS 4 was around. When folks bitch about how Linux rul3z and Solaris suxx0rs cause they don't give anything back, they need to remember that Sun invented NFS and some other things.

  4. Basis for Net and OpenBSD port? by LizardKing · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a little bit unsure of the licensing that surrounds Java ports, but could NetBSD (and Open perhaps) base a native port on this work? Do Sun hold the reins when it comes to Java ports by only releasing the TCK under restrictive terms?

    Currently I develop Java stuff on NetBSD using the official Sun JDK and the Linux emulation layer. If I could get a native version of the JDK then it would be quite nice to lose the need for the emulation stuff from my kernel, along with the Linux bits from SuSE.

    Chris

    1. Re:Basis for Net and OpenBSD port? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if the source isn't there, fat chance of ever seeing it as an official port in the openbsd tree. theo keeps shit-licensed software out for a reason, and i couldn't agree with him more.

    2. Re:Basis for Net and OpenBSD port? by Dahan · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Nobody's talking about putting it into the OpenBSD tree. Besides, who cares what Theo thinks?

    3. Re:Basis for Net and OpenBSD port? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      An OpenBSD port is fine ... it just wont get into the main source tree, but the ports tree has lots of strictly licensed stuff.

  5. Developer lashes out: What Killed FreeBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    The End of FreeBSD

    [ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

    When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

    Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

    FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

    It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

    So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

    Discussion

    I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

    From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

    There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

    Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

    Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

    Shouts

    To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

    To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

    To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

    To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

    To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

    Future

    I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

    However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

    You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

    = Mike

    --

    To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
  6. Getting Started with BSD by Quizme2000 · · Score: 1

    If I wanted to get started on BSD where is a good place to begin?

    Don't give me that ask Google BS. I already know that they have a linux specifc search, it doesn't really answer my question though.

    --
    "Get them before they get....
    1. Re:Getting Started with BSD by mrowlands · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Well I recommend the West Indies, specifically Martinique, good climate, not too hot, nice food,
      and generally rather civilised. Although Bequia is nice too, but net-connectivity could be an issue.

    2. Re:Getting Started with BSD by Quizme2000 · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      I bow to your 5-digit UID and wise-ass remark, thank you. Your answer has provided no insight and proved you have nothing better to with puny insignificant life. Please stop wasting my O2. Have a great day!

      --
      "Get them before they get....
    3. Re:Getting Started with BSD by LizardKing · · Score: 5, Informative

      If I wanted to get started on BSD where is a good place to begin?

      If you want to try NetBSD, then download the ISO image from:

      ftp://ftp.xx.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/iso/1.6/i386c d.iso

      If there's a NetBSD mirror site for your country, then replace the "xx" in the FTP server address with your country code. Failing that, the canonical ftp.netbsd.org server is pretty nippy.

      Then burn the ISO to a CD-ROM, straightforward enough, although if you need extra instructions they can be found here:

      http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/bootcd.html# cdrecord

      Finally, grab the extremely good NetBSD Guide from:

      http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/

      Installation should take little more than 20 minutes on modern hardware. Configure the system (little more than editing /etc/rc.conf) and reboot. Then read up on pkgsrc, which is described in the NetBSD guide. This will allow you to install loads of extra software.

      FreeBSD and OpenBSD are equally worth a look, but I find Net just that little bit easier to install and configure.

      Chris

    4. Re:Getting Started with BSD by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

      What are you wanting to do?

    5. Re:Getting Started with BSD by hmendes_br · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hey, I once had the same idea (and I'm still on BSD until now), so here is a big clue: FreeBSD. This is a robust and fast OS, very well organized. It has a straightforward method for updating (you can *easily* compile the entire system by yourself) , also featuring an extremely easy-to-use and powerful ports system (the way you can install apps... it's much simpler than anything like apt-get or so). Also, on their site you can find a complete, up-to-date and freely available BOOK about using, administrating and getting the best of your system. Try it, I'm sure you would like!!!

      Get the ISO (assuming you have an i386):
      Only first CD is enough

      On the Handbook, you find the installation instructions on the second chapter:
      Here is the link

      Okay, I think it's a good start... Note that if your box is not an i386 you still have options... just search their ftp site

      Another thing, on their site, you can find two versions of the system: 4.7 and 5.0. The 4.7 is still the production release, so the link above is for 4.7. But if you want, you could also install 5.0, but be sure to read this before.

      Good Luck!

    6. Re:Getting Started with BSD by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

      Before you get your undies all twisty, realize that you asked a fairly general question with no obvious answer. What does "Getting started" mean? Do you need help figuring out which of Free, Open, or Net to get? Then tell people what your needs or wants are and ask. Do you need help getting it downloaded? There are no Distros of {Free,Net,Open}BSD but the One True {Free,Net,Open}BSD, at http://www.{free,net,open}bsd.org/ You can download .isos for Net And FreeBSD. You can't download an .iso from www.openbsd.org, but you can buy the CD there. Go to amazon.com, buy the freebsd book, it comes with a CD. And there is a BSD search on Google as well, http://www.google.com/bsd FreeBSD isn't trying to hide, you can find loads on it fairly easily.

      I think the comment was based on the fact that you gave no info on what you wanted when it is damn easy to find at least cursory info. It's a perception whole "I'm not going to bother to think or work so I'll ask slashdot so they can do it for me".

    7. Re:Getting Started with BSD by mbadolato · · Score: 2, Informative

      And FYI, 4.8 is at the RC stage and should be released within the month

    8. Re:Getting Started with BSD by realdpk · · Score: 1

      Of course the linux specific search doesn't answer your question. It's for linux.

      Try http://www.google.com/bsd

    9. Re:Getting Started with BSD by cpeterso · · Score: 1


      I just wanted to give a thumbs up to NetBSD. I have an old Sun SPARC machine for a home firewall. I tried installing the Debian SPARC port, but the installer would randomly fail and panic. I tried installing OpenBSD, but its installer would also fail. I tried installing NetBSD. Simple install and no problems! Plus I find the NetBSD /etc/rc.conf easier to configure than Debian.

    10. Re:Getting Started with BSD by rsax · · Score: 2, Informative
    11. Re:Getting Started with BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.freebsd.org

    12. Re:Getting Started with BSD by Maxlor · · Score: 1

      Here's a great place: bsdforums

  7. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  8. Just to clarify by Larne · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is a native port of JDK 1.4.1, which has indeed been eagerly awaited. High-quality native ports of the JDK 1.3 series have been around for quite some time.

    1. Re:Just to clarify by jo42 · · Score: 1
      Beg to differ a wee bit...

      According to http://www.freebsd.org/java/dists/13.html, only 2-3 weeks ago did 1.3 pass all of Sun's compatability tests. We're still waiting for a solid 1.4 release on FreeBSD because of the nonsense requiring X, or at least Xvfb, to be running to support Java graphics calls - what was Sun thinking? Right, Java was originally designed by a bunch of 20-something kids at Sun that never had any experience in the real world doing languages...

    2. Re:Just to clarify by JKR · · Score: 4, Informative
      We're still waiting for a solid 1.4 release on FreeBSD because of the nonsense requiring X, or at least Xvfb, to be running to support Java graphics calls

      Er, that's exactly what Sun (finally) fixed in 1.4; the ability to run AWT applications "headless" (without X). Finally your app can call Toolkit.getToolkit().beep() and not crash horribly trying to connect to :0...

      Jon.

    3. Re:Just to clarify by kwerle · · Score: 1

      I believe this is actually to be the basis for a binary release, which was announced about 2 years ago.

      Frankly, I'll believe it when I see it.

  9. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Elegy For *BSD


    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.

  10. Linux bin? by sporty · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the make file...

    BUILD_DEPENDS+= ${JDK14DIR}/bin/javac:${PORTSDIR}/java/linux-sun-j dk14


    SO we stil need to bootstrap off of linux's jdk binary? When will we have a version that's independent of the linux binaries?
    --

    -
    ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    1. Re:Linux bin? by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 5, Informative

      When Alexey gets all 27,000+ tests passing, Sun stamps it and they get to ship a binary image, instead of making people compile from the source.

      All 1.4.1 source compiles require a working 1.4.1 java compiler. After you have compiled and installed it once, you can set NATIVE_BOOTSTRAP and get rid of the linux bins.

      BWP

    2. Re:Linux bin? by rplacd · · Score: 4, Informative

      SO we stil need to bootstrap off of linux's jdk binary?

      Yes. Presumably once the JDK works on FreeBSD, Sun will merge in the FreeBSD-specific code, and we'll have a version independent of Linux binaries.

      Note that ones this FreeBSD port is complete, you should be a install precompiled JDK binaries. This hasn't been the case in the past because the 1.2/1.3 builds have all been unofficial, and can't be distributed in binary form.

    3. Re:Linux bin? by bsd_usr · · Score: 1

      No kidding, it's like having to install Linux to boot FreeBSD. The idea of it is lame.

      I'd like a completely native version of the JDK. Also, it would be nice to get the olders versions certified and stuff. Just to be complete, I guess.

    4. Re:Linux bin? by sporty · · Score: 1

      My next question is, why not patch the linux source version to make a freebsd binary directly? Why compile the linux version just so you can compile a freebsd version? Sounds like a lot of hoop jumping. I had to do it too to get 1.3.1 working. Now I have to do it again for 1.4.1?

      Granted.. it uses /usr/ports, it's a lengthly process for the 'puter to do. I think make world is faster?

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    5. Re:Linux bin? by BSDFreak · · Score: 1

      I believe they are working on getting 1.3.1 certified too.

    6. Re:Linux bin? by bovinewasteproduct · · Score: 2, Informative

      You lost me there... The three Linux JDKs in the ports tree are BINARY installs, you don't have to compile them.

      You install the binary Linux JDK so you can compile the FreeBSD JDK sources to binary form. After this you can set NATIVE_BOOTSTRAP and get rid of the Linux binary because you now have a FreeBSD binary (but you can't distribute it).

      Once Alexey gets the TCK to pass, and Sun gets them the stamp, then you won't have to compile anything, just install the FreeBSD binary JDK.

      The problem right now is that the FreeBSD Project/Foundation CAN NOT distribute binary JDKs, so you have to compile it yourself, which requires a working compiler...

      BWP

    7. Re:Linux bin? by sporty · · Score: 1

      Thought it was a source build, not a binary install.

      You aren't lost, I was :)

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    8. Re:Linux bin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      Too late. *BSD is dying.

    9. Re:Linux bin? by cbiffle · · Score: 1

      I think perhaps you may be confusing this release with Sun's native port. That's not what this is, though we've been waiting for that for some time (Dec.2001, I believe).

      What this is is an upgrade to the eyesbeyond patchset used to build JDK1.2 and 1.3 before. It's been merged into the ports tree, hence the announcement; it allows you to build a native FreeBSD JDK using the Sun sources and, for boostrapping, the Linux binaries.

      Unless something massive and invisible has happened that I missed, there will be no binary packages as a result of this release, because of Sun's licensing. If you'd taken the time to build the port in question, you'll note that you still have to go through a clickwrap to obtain the sources from Sun; it doesn't auto-fetch like most ports. Until Sun's native port is released, don't expect a native FreeBSD binary JDK unless you build one yourself.

    10. Re:Linux bin? by rplacd · · Score: 1

      I am, yes, assuming that this will turn into a Sun release at some point. Once all the tests patch and it's proven to work in the field, Sun can integrate the patches into its source tree.

      I believe this is a precursor to the Sun release because -- as far as I know -- no one else is working on porting Java to FreeBSD.

    11. Re:Linux bin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the linux jdk source code is heavily modified to make up for the fact that linuxthreads sucks.

      it made more sense to port the solaris source to freebsd. the threading implementations matched up better.

    12. Re:Linux bin? by footility · · Score: 1

      a binary install will always be needed to bootstrap
      the jdk build. That said, I've heard rumblings
      recently on freebsd-java that 1.4.1 is getting
      _very_ close to passing the sun tests which will
      allow freebsd to distribute a native binary package.

      --
      What f*ing box!?!?
  11. Linux is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    It is official; Netcraft confirms: Linux is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered Linux community when IDC confirmed that Linux market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that Linux has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. Linux is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict Linux's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Linux faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Linux because Linux is dying. Things are looking very bad for Linux. As many of us are already aware, Linux continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    Redhat is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time Redhat developers Michael Evans and Timothy Buckley only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: Redhat is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    Mandrake leader Jacques states that there are 7000 users of Mandrake. How many users of Slackware are there? Let's see. The number of Mandrake versus Slackware posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 Slackware users. SuSE posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of Slackware posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of Slackware. A recent article put Debian at about 80 percent of the Linux market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 Debian users. This is consistent with the number of Debian Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, Mandrake went out of business and was taken over by Redhat who sell another troubled OS. Now Redhat is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that Linux has steadily declined in market share. Linux is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If Linux is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. Linux continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Linux is dead.

    Fact: Linux is dying

  12. Check out your local cemetery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Locations are available from your local government. Be careful not to visit between midnight and dawn as this is when the 10 or so *BSD users gather to sacrifrice a virgin (i.e. one of their own ilk).

  13. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a mere fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dying

  14. Huh? by CoolVibe · · Score: 1
    I thought FreeBSD already had a native java in ports. It used the Sun Linux java vm to compile the classes on FreeBSD. See /usr/ports/java/jdk13

    And I installed it over 6 months ago. Am I missing something here? Or was that stuff alpha to begin with (although I never experienced problems with it, it didn't _feel_ beta anyway)

    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      > I thought FreeBSD already had a native java in ports. It used the Sun Linux java vm to compile the classes on FreeBSD. See /usr/ports/java/jdk13

      JDK 1.3 and 1.4 are very different things. Most notable differences from internals point of view that in 1.4 only native threading model is supported. And since green_threads support was dropped -- it become much more difficult to port JDK 1.4 anythere.

    2. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The jdk13 in ports requires a lot of patching. Also you have to manually download the source since Sun hasn't made a native freebsd jvm.

  15. Hello again to Freenet! by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

    I'd been running a Freenet server in its own jail, and finally had to abandon it because the various flavors of JDK 1.4 were too unstable, and the native JDK 1.3 was dog slow. If the native 1.4 really works at a reasonable level, I can finally start hosting that service again. Thanks, guys!

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  16. Freebsd.org by nurb432 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Start there, its the largest and best supported ( meaning for getting help, and hardware support ) BSD out there of the 3 main OSS BSD's..

    You can grab an ISO ( only need disk 1 ) or just install off floppy direct across the wire.

    Plenty of manuals, how-tos, etc.. Plus you dont have to worry about what 'flavor' you are using like with linux.. If it FBSD, its FBSD...

    The others are fine too, thats just my preference.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  17. anyword on native thread support vs. green? by davmct · · Score: 1

    We've been trying to use this for quite some time (the 1.3 at least on FreeBSD), and have had issues with the threading model implemented. Not sure why whoever decided to port used green threads. Also, the SecureRandom is broken due to the number of threads it instantiates to determine a "random" number. It seems that through our use, extensive use of threads causes the entire system to crash, which meant we had to rework alot of code to specifically work on BSD by limiting the number of java threads we invoked.

    Any further thoughts/ideas on this?

  18. Support native Thread priority scheduling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux's JVMs (and many Unix JVMs) don't properly implement native priority scheduling for Java Thread objects. Can anyone please comment if in the know on the threading library used and if it does indeed support priority scheduling?