Linux JVMs Running Under BSD?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux JVMs Running Under BSD?

Posted by Cliff on Tuesday March 11, 2003 @05:58PM from the can-you-do-that dept.

Mock asks: "I work for a web services company, and so part of our business process involves setting up web servers for our customers that include a JVM for running our software. Although I've found FreeBSD to be rock-solid for server applications and the quickest to fix security issues, the JVM support has been lagging behind other systems, for some time now. I would like to know if it is wise, or even possible, to run the Linux JVM under BSD? Are there other alternatives I'd be better off considering (besides using a different operating system)?"

25 of 41 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Whaaaaaat? by Breakerofthings · 2003-03-11 18:19 · Score: 3, Informative

Like this?
It's called the ports tree. by JumpSuit+Boy · 2003-03-11 18:22 · Score: 5, Informative

http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-blackdown-jdk 12/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-blackdow n-jdk 13/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-blackdow n-jdk 14/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-ibm-jdk1 3/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-ibm-jdk14 /
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-sun-jdk12/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-sun-jdk13/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-sun-jdk14/

or you could just use the native ones
http://www.freshports.org/java/jdk12/
http: //www.freshports.org/java/jdk13/
http://www.fresh ports.org/java/jdk14/

That said I used it to run a small enhydra/xmlc java web app. In my last job and I performed well and with the recent (last six months) inclusion of the hotspot stuff it's much faster.

--
Oh really?
You could use? by bumblebury · 2003-03-11 19:01 · Score: 1, Flamebait

An open source programming language, like Python, Perl or PHP. That and you can also use rotor, microsoft's .NET environment which works natively on FreeBSD.
1. Re:You could use? by aminorex · 2003-03-11 19:12 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Java is open source too. Kaffe is Open Source (tm),
  and the JDK has source freely available, so while it
  is not Open Source (tm), it is open source, but not
  Free Software (tm) -- just free software.
  
  That, and you can also use gcj. gcj doesn't do AWT
  or Swing yet, so use SWT for GUI stuff.
  
  --
  -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
Re:It's called the ports tree. Tsarkon Reports by Anonymous Coward · 2003-03-11 19:38 · Score: 1, Insightful

Okay? Which of these are Production ready or stable. FreeBSD is god, yes, and Sun is being a fag for not porting a native JVM, but you have to tell people if these are fucking stable or not. Otherwise its just anecdotal crap. We all know this shit exists, but does it work for you?
And learn to use fucking links.
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-blackdown-jdk 12/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-blackdown-jdk 13/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-blackdown-jdk 14/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-ibm-jdk13/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-ibm-jdk14/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-sun-jdk12/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-sun-jdk13/
http://www.freshports.org/java/linux-sun-jdk14/

or you could just use the native ones
http://www.freshports.org/java/jdk12/
http://www.freshports.org/java/jdk13/
http://www.freshports.org/java/jdk14/
please stop confusing people by g4dget · 2003-03-11 21:03 · Score: 2, Informative

"Java" is a trademark of Sun Microsystems. It's a platform, the total of the Java language and the Java libraries, as defined by Sun. Most of the Java platform exists only in a Sun proprietary implementation, which you can obtain under roughly the same conditions as Microsoft's "shared source" implementation.
Kaffe and GNU gcj are not implementations of Java. At best, they are implementations of the Java language or virtual machine, but even in that capacity, they are not blessed by Sun. Porting most substantial Sun Java-based software system to Kaffe or gcj is essentially impossible.
So, please spare us your cynicism or misleading use of language. Sun's implementation of Java is not "open source" in any sense that the term is commonly understood (and the term was created and defined by Eric Raymond). It isn't even close to open source; you enter into legal obligations to Sun just by looking at it. If you treat it like it's open source, you may get into lots of legal trouble with Sun. Neither are gcj or kaffe an implementation of "Java"; they aren't even close, as you would find out if you tried porting anything to them.
However, we agree on this: gcj is a pretty good compiler, and SWT is a pretty good toolkit. I do recommend using them instead of Sun Java. They also have lots of practical advantages, like being smaller, starting up faster, and requiring less memory. But gcj and SWT together don't make "Java". If you are really careful, you can write libraries that will compile and run under both gcj and Sun Java, but it's a significant amount of work and requires a lot of care (as I can tell you from first hand experience).
1. Re:please stop confusing people by Orthanc_duo · 2003-03-11 21:45 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  The source of the Java Libraries are released. The Java Language specification is open.. ie. it can be viewed and implemented by anyone.
  
  Sun has a proprietary java compiler / JVM but there is nothing to stop someone from implementing there own (jikes for example).
  Same situation as gcc vs. Borland C compiler (for example)
2. Re:please stop confusing people by aminorex · 2003-03-11 22:01 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing misleading about using language according
  to the norms of ordinary and dictionary usage.
  What's misleading is loading words with political
  baggage and trademark crapola.
  
  I've ported more than one large application to gcj,
  and it's not rocket science.
  
  I agree that running under both gcj and jdk is
  frought with annoyances -- it's a death of a
  thousand cuts. That's why I just use GCC as my
  platform, my portability layer, for Java code.
  
  And yes, I'll call it Java, just as I'll call
  this paper thingy a kleenex. And when I open
  a box of candy, a gift from a sweetheart, I'll
  call it an Open Box, full of Free Candy.
  
  So sue me.
  
  --
  -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
3. Re:please stop confusing people by IronDuck · 2003-03-12 00:14 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  It's a platform, the total of the Java language and the Java libraries, as defined by Sun.
  
  Java is defined less and less by Sun alone as it matures. One of the best things about Java is the JCP (Java Community Process) which defines the growth of the Java platform. So, while Java is not as "Open" as some would like, it is a very open and robust language. It's not like Sun defines everything, and reaps all the benefits. The licensing is designed to protect their substantial investment in the technology.
4. Re:please stop confusing people by g4dget · 2003-03-12 05:05 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  The source of the Java Libraries are released.
  The source to Windows NT has been released, too. That doesn't make Windows NT open source, and talking about it in that way would be very confusing.
  The Java Language specification is open.. ie. it can be viewed and implemented by anyone.
  Even if that were true, it would be irrelevant. We are not talking about the Java Language, we are talking about Java, which is a language and a set of libraries.
  But your claim actually does not even appear to be true: as far as I can tell, Sun has made no legally binding commitment to allow "anyone" to implement Java. So far, all we have is a letter of intent, as part of the JCP, to allow open source implementations.
5. Re:please stop confusing people by g4dget · 2003-03-12 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  Nothing misleading about using language according to the norms of ordinary and dictionary usage.
  Which would that be? The term "open source" had no meaning before Raymond defined it.
  And yes, I'll call it Java, just as I'll call this paper thingy a kleenex.
  Well, you can call it "Java". You can also call your dog your girlfriend if you like. But the guy was asking about setting stuff up for customers. Customers expect something Sun Java compatible, not "Aminorex Java". Furthermore, since he would be misusing the Java trademark as part of a business transaction, he would be liable for trademark infringement.
6. Re:please stop confusing people by cicadia · 2003-03-12 13:41 · Score: 1
  
  as far as I can tell, Sun has made no legally binding commitment to allow "anyone" to implement Java.
  Does this count?
  Sun Microsystems, Inc. (SUN) hereby grants to you a fully paid, nonexclusive, nontransferable, perpetual, worldwide limited license (without the right to sublicense) under SUN's intellectual property rights that are essential to practice this specification. This license allows and is limited to the creation and distribution of clean room implementations of this specification that: (i) include a complete implementation of the current version of this specification without subsetting or supersetting; (ii) implement all the interfaces and functionality of the required packages of the Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition, as defined by SUN, without subsetting or supersetting; (iii) do not add any additional packages, classes, or interfaces to the java.* or javax.* packages or their subpackages; (iv) pass all test suites relating to the most recent published version of the specification of the Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition, that are available from SUN six (6) months prior to any beta release of the clean room implementation or upgrade thereto; (v) do not derive from SUN source code or binary materials; and (vi) do not include any SUN source code or binary materials without an appropriate and separate license from SUN.
  
  It's from the copyright statement for The Java Language Specification, Second Edition by Sun. You can download your own copy, complete with this license, here.
  
  --
  Living better through chemicals
7. Re:please stop confusing people by g4dget · 2003-03-12 14:47 · Score: 1
  
  I wish it did, but it doesn't really help. To name just some of the problems with that "license", it's non-transferable, Sun has a case-by-case final say in whether you are compliant, and the conditions for compliance are essentially impossible to meet. Not even the licensed ports from Apple, IBM, or Sun itself satisfy the conditions of that license.
8. Re:please stop confusing people by aminorex · 2003-03-13 09:18 · Score: 1
  
  The term "open source" has been used for decades to
  refer to information sources which are not
  clandestine.
  
  JavaScript is JavaScript, whether it is called
  JScript or ECMAScript or JavaScript. In ordinary
  usage, Java refers to a language which may or may
  not correspond to Sun Java in its particulars, but
  does so in the main.
  
  My customers don't give a rip about Sun's
  trademarks, because they don't use them.
  I use the word Java to refer to the Java language
  abstractly considered, and there is no actionable
  infrigment in that act.
  
  Get real, dude.
  
  --
  -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
Beware by cattlepr0d · 2003-03-11 23:41 · Score: 2, Informative

We ran a Tomcat based website using the linux JVM on FreeBSD. It rarely stayed up for more than a day at a time (someone told me it's a good way to expose bugs in the emulation layer ;). However, with the native FreeBSD JVM (and the Shujit JIT compiler) it's rock solid.

--
R Tape loading error, 0:1
1. Re:Beware by questionlp · 2003-03-12 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  Little nit to pick, it's compatibility layer and not an emulation layer (since the instructions are still x86, just in a different binary format and using libraries compiled in a different operating system; think of it as running DOS apps under NT 4.0).
Things are changing... by cymen · 2003-03-12 01:31 · Score: 1

JDK 1.4.1 patchset 3 on FreeBSD (daemonnews.org)

points to:

JDK 1.4.1 patchset 3 on FreeBSD (at freebsdforums.org)

the patches:

http://www.eyesbeyond.com/freebsddom/java/jdk14.ht ml

Note they are ALPHA! But this is good news for native jdk on freebsd.
YOU stop confusing people by Anonymous Coward · 2003-03-12 03:17 · Score: 1, Insightful

Once again, someone getting doubley confused about open source.

"Open Source" will never, has never, will never has already have been going to be, mean what you think it means.

Java source code is available, under license, which doesn't cost.

Whilst GPL/LGPL has open source, open source doesn't have GPL/LGPL.

Source ... License, Source... License...

One is the code, the other is the License.

You are confusing the agreeable instincts of the open source movement/GPL'd licenses, and open source, community driven well managed software, that has a key and important role for many industries, managed by a superb company, but with a license term that protects the product.

Of course, you may choose to use the SWT libraries, go ahead! They are good, I like them, hope they development on all platforms continues.

On the matter of GTK's, AWT and swing were designed to be two distinct APIs, and that stupid 10 reasons why we need Java 3 article was written by the Football equivilent of a pissed up 59 year old mental patient down you local, who screams 'REF YOUR BLIND' and hurls abuse at the players on the small TV, long after the match finished, and he didn't even know who was playing.

Woah, I'm Kramer.
You could go toe-to-toe with RMS by 0x0d0a · 2003-03-12 03:23 · Score: 1

You could go toe-to-toe to RMS. Reminds me when a Crystal Space developer asked him a straightforward question. He was trying to strictly comply with the GPL, and instead Stallman sent back a string of about ten letters bitching about how the CS guy was misusing "Open Source" and "Free" and kept ignoring the question.'

For what it's worth, gcj actually is not as awesome as you would expect just because it's a native code compiler. IBM's JDK/JVM produces code significantly faster under Linux, even without native code compilation, for example. It's the fastest zero-cost way to run Java on Linux.

Kaffe, despite being free, has really, really, *really* atrocious performance from both a memory and CPU standpoint.

Sun's Java implementation is okay, but not as peppy as IBM's implementation.

--
May we never see th
Sun Java(TM)(R) by mirabilos · 2003-03-12 03:27 · Score: 1

The Sun JDK 1.3.1_07 for GNU/Linux/x86
runs fairly well on my OpenBSD boxen.

I use it only for the freenet
project, though as a high-volume server.
It's quite CPU and disc intensive.

--
My Karma isn't excellent, damn it! (And /. still does not get UTF-8 right in 2012. Wow.)
Depends on what you are trying to do.... by the+eric+conspiracy · 2003-03-12 04:01 · Score: 1

Yahoo decided to go with PHP for their web development because of the poor support of Java in BSD. Their particular problem was that J2EE is thread intensive, and FreeBSD supports threads poorly.
Re:It's called the ports tree. Tsarkon Reports by JumpSuit+Boy · 2003-03-12 06:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

Ok no need to be pissy. Of the native ones (I only use the linux ones to bootstrap compile the native)

I have been using jdk131 for production app dev and web serving for about 2.5 years w/ no problems. The recent inclusion of the hotspot realy inproved performance in 1.3.

I have started to use jdk14 on freebsd5-current for testing and it seems fine. I would not deploy with it yet it is a beta it still fails 20 out 2700 tests. It is worth noting that both the native and linux jdk14 really like running on freebsd5 and are not as happy on 4.X

--
Oh really?
linux emulation under FreeBSD??? by josepha48 · 2003-03-12 06:15 · Score: 1

who ever heard of such a thing?
Yes it is possible to run the Linux jvms under FreeBSD as well as NetBSD. Look at the ports, both OS's have ports of the JVM's.
Also the 1.4.1 JVM has been ported from linux blackdown project to FreeBSD.
Below is the story ...
http://bsd.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/03/07/ 1458220

--
Only 'flamers' flame!
Re:It's called the ports tree. Tsarkon Reports by mike_sucks · 2003-03-12 11:53 · Score: 1

Wow, "fucking links". That sounds like fun. Is a fucking link the thing that connects people on a sex chart?

Or do you just have a really fucking limited vocabulary?

Or are you just lacking in human interaction skills?

Or are you just a mindless git?

Or what?

[Note to mods: -1 Offtopic, -1 Flamebait, +1 ParentSubmittedByWanker]

--
-- "So, what's the deal with Auntie Gerschwitz et all?"
I like FreeBSD... by tokki · 2003-03-13 05:12 · Score: 1

BUT

I think it's not a viable platform for Java. The threads issue is a huge hassle, and there's all sorts of problems that can arrise that are difficult to troubleshoot in Java even on a native platform.

I work at a site that used the 1.1.8 native release on FreeBSD for a while, and it went ok. Then we upgraded some Java code, and things went quickly downhill. We'd have hangups that we were never able to figure out, and each server would have one at least once a day, which was a nightmare for me. We used Java, Tomcat, and Apache 1.3.27.

Even though the company I work for is fairly FreeBSD fantatical, it wasn't a hard choice to switch to Linux and IBM's 1.4.1 JDK. We switched, plopped on our code, and boom, no more problems.

For a development environment, there's definately something to be said for using a viable and trusted environment. Not to say I don't trust FreeBSD, but I don't trust FreeBSD with either the not-so-tested ports or the Linux JVM under emulation. For all that trouble, might as well make the switch. Right tool for the right job, and all that.