Slashdot Mirror


64-Bit Java For Linux

LWATCDR writes "First we got 64-bit Flash; then the beginnings of 64-bit Wine; now Sun is providing a 64-bit Java plugin. For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux."

29 of 387 comments (clear)

  1. 64 bit Java? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Linux has had 64 bit java for donkeys years... *rereads summary* - oh, Java browser plugin. A piece of the 90s I was hoping we'd all left behind.

    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    1. Re:64 bit Java? by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Funny

      Someone has to be slower to load than the acrobat reader plugin.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:64 bit Java? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Someone has to be slower to load than the acrobat reader plugin.

      Not even Java can take that prize.

      Java Joke:

      Knock Knock.

      Who's there?

      ...

      ...

      ...

      ...

      Java!

      Adobe Joke:

      Knock Knock.

      Who's there?

      ...

      ...

      ...

      ...

      Crash.

      --
      There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    3. Re:64 bit Java? by Al+Al+Cool+J · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's not really a properly-formed knock knock joke. How about:

      Knock Knock.

      Who's there?

      ...

      ...

      ...

      ...

      Java!

      Java who?

      ...

      ...

      ...

      ...

      Java few minutes? 'Cause this might take a while.

    4. Re:64 bit Java? by doktorjayd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      you're confusing java applets circa 1997 with the java platform.

      take a look through the it job listings and see how much java comes up.

      much, if not most, server side *enterprise* work is done in java, which is a mature, robust, reliable, performant and scalable platform for which there are myriad commercial and open source libraries to give any project a great set of building blocks and frameworks on which to build.

      i check out language du jour a couple times a year, and every time it reaffirms java's benefits.

      the problem with applets is they were generally pretty hacky, but there are some good ones out there.

      ( check out the yahoo games website - my wife has been addicted to literati for years, and its a nice little java applet ).

      java on the desktop has a place too, however its the same set of rules for design and structure as applets: done well, nobody would know/care what language its written in, but done poorly without care for threading models and it'll quickly turn into a steaming pile.

      then theres j2me, and i'd wager if you have any tivo type device, or even set-top box for your cable service, or blu-ray player, or most mobile phones these days, then you have java working for you there too.

      not that i'm arguing for applets by any means, but the more people spread the same old rants as above, the more i'm inclined to correct them.

    5. Re:64 bit Java? by this+great+guy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Linux has had a full-featured 64-bit Java plugin that even includes LiveConnect support for at least months via IcedTea, a special build by Red Hat of the official OpenJDK source tree. For example Ubuntu 8.10 ships this 64-bit plugin as the icedtea6-plugin package, which I have been using for the past 2 months. And, no, I am not talking about the GCJ or Blackdown Java implementations which are significantly more buggy or incomplete (lacks LiveConnect support).

      What is new today is that Sun just released a development build of Java 6u12, build b02, which includes the 64-bit plugin. However technically we still have to wait for a couple months before 6u12 is officially released. But again you can already get a 64-bit plugin based on essentially the same source tree via IcedTea.

    6. Re:64 bit Java? by glwtta · · Score: 4, Informative

      And this story is only important if somebody out there has a burning need to run a 64bit Java app... in a web browser.

      Actually, the way I understand it, it's for those who want to use the plugin with a 64-bit browser (I didn't realize that was not possible until now). There's no such thing as a "64-bit Java app", only 64-bit JVM implementations.

      Can anybody name a good reason to develop new code in the environment? Yes a lot of legacy stuff was created in the 1990s while Java was the new shiny for people too blind to see (or with a PHB too blind...) the myriad problems but new projects?

      You're joking, right? Java Applets are dead and buried - and with good reason, they were a horrible hack from the beginning - but Java itself is one of the most important languages we have.

      I know Java-bashing is a popular Slashdot pastime, and certainly it's not the most exciting and sexy language out there, but it's popular for a reason. It's got its share of problems (gasp! something that isn't perfect!) and more that its share of outdated myths (gasp! modern JVMs perform well!), but it strikes a pretty good balance between abstraction, performance, and complexity (much as I hate to use this argument, not every programmer out there is a rock star).

      I really want to hear what you would recommend as a wholesale replacement for Java. I'm pretty sure I don't know of anything that's as broadly applicable.

      (Plus, with projects like Scala and Clojure it's looking increasingly like the JVM isn't going anywhere any time soon, regardless of Java's fate)

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    7. Re:64 bit Java? by Skrapion · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh please. You're telling me you can implement a webcam viewer with Javascript?

      The only real alternative for Java applets is Flash. Of course, compared to Flash, Java applets have a lot of downfalls. The VM takes a ridiculous amount of time to start up, and it's really intrusive when it sits in your system tray and constantly announces its new updates.

      However, this is Slashdot, which means there's lots of open-source advocates around. So for all the OSS advocates out there, stop and think for a minute before you bash Java applets. They're not great, but they're the only open alternative to Flash right now.

      --
      The details are trivial and useless; The reasons, as always, purely human ones.
    8. Re:64 bit Java? by psetzer · · Score: 4, Informative

      I wait with bated breath for a hyperlink that I can click on to play an Ajax version of Quake 2. Until then I'll just have to make do with http://www.bytonic.de/downloads/jake2_jogl11.jnlp instead.

      --
      "Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is living in a state of sin." -- John von Neumann
    9. Re:64 bit Java? by doktorjayd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now it's racks of big ass servers or blades groaning under badly designed layers and layers of Java 'middleware'

      so your premis here is the problem is the language/platform rather than the design at fault?

      If you have insane amounts of CPU and memory to throw at it to cover up the slowness

      either you need to replace the tandy coco you mention later as your primary pc, or you could actually _try_ it before you bag it. ( trying it again after 1997 might also be an idea..)

      Must have missed it.

      that tends to happen when you have HASUB* syndrome. it happens, dont worry about it. you probably havent noticed a lot of stuff.

      .. some rant about java and vista bloat related to java desktop. and then brings solaris and mac into it. pfft.

      yawn.

      No, you notice when a small app starts sucking up all available memory. Java sucks memory so hard GNOME starts looking lean in comparison

      i can malloc my way into something that smells the same in c too.. only in java you're less likely to leak.

      hey actually put players on shelves that take upwards of two minutes to go from tray close to anything useful appearing on the display

      huh? i drop blu-ray disks into my ps3 and its playing within a few seconds. you're smoking crack.

      I've got a cheap crappy basic cell phone. You can almost see individual pixels draw on the darned thing...

      unless you run an application on your cheap crappy phone, you're probably looking at just the cheapness and the crappiness of the phone, not java.

      i think what you really meant in the above post was more along the lines of 'get off my lawn'.

      i know this is slashdot, but occasional fact checking really cant hurt if you're going to go on a raving rant about your hatred of specific technologies.

      *HASUB syndrome: Head And Shoulders Up Bum syndrome

    10. Re:64 bit Java? by Simon80 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I really want to hear what you would recommend as a wholesale replacement for Java. I'm pretty sure I don't know of anything that's as broadly applicable.

      Try C++, which seems to get much less attention than it should. It's undeniably faster than Java, but equally good at creating usable abstractions.

    11. Re:64 bit Java? by julesh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only real alternative for Java applets is Flash. Of course, compared to Flash, Java applets have a lot of downfalls. The VM takes a ridiculous amount of time to start up, and it's really intrusive when it sits in your system tray and constantly announces its new updates.

      Down to less than 2 seconds on my system, these days. Each new release seems to take less time than the last. And the update announcements can be disabled, if they annoy you.

      Also, Java applets have a lot of upsides to flash as well:

      * Ability to access network services (not just via XMLHttpRequests), so live streaming data is a possibility
      * Signed applets can access local system resources that Flash cannot
      * Use useful APIs to do stuff that's beyond the capabilities of Flash (e.g. the Java port of OpenGL)
      * Don't have to design your user interface as a series of frames that you move between to show and hide aspects of it (yeuch... I've done one project of Flash UI design, and that was more than enough for a lifetime thanks.)
      * Much, much easier to support internationalisation
      * Acceptable calculation speed for CPU-intensive stuff

      I'm sure there're more. OK, Java applets are a heavyweight solution. But they are the only solution other than ActiveX for many problems.

  2. 64-bit and 32-bit binaries by robo_mojo · · Score: 5, Informative

    For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux.

    Lack of 64-bit {Java,Flash,Wine} doesn't hold you back from 64-bit Linux. A decent Linux distro can handle both 64-bit and 32-bit binaries.

    1. Re:64-bit and 32-bit binaries by aled · · Score: 4, Informative
      --

      "I think this line is mostly filler"
  3. For most people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux.

    Except the fact that Microsoft Windows is superior in every aspect.

  4. Re:128 bit computing is around the corner by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

    64.0 bits should be enough for anyone.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  5. Re:Aw crap by aled · · Score: 4, Funny

    obviously you need to reinstall... with 128-bits Linux...

    --

    "I think this line is mostly filler"
  6. Pamplona: Running with the bits. by Ostracus · · Score: 5, Funny

    ""First we got 64-bit Flash; then the beginnings of 64-bit Wine; now Sun is providing a 64-bit Java plugin. For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux."

    Owning a 32 bit computer might be an issue.

    --
    Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
  7. Re:Developers section red now ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Makes a change, most people around here are joke blind.

  8. no DEB files? by supernova_hq · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is it with large corporations and only creating RPM files for their software? I got the .bin file, but it just extracts to the current directory, without listing where all the files need to be copied to...

    If anyone can post a quick tutorial (or list of folder locations), that would be awesome.

    1. Re:no DEB files? by tyrione · · Score: 4, Informative

      What is it with large corporations and only creating RPM files for their software? I got the .bin file, but it just extracts to the current directory, without listing where all the files need to be copied to...

      The simplest thing you could do, is use the "alien" package to convert it to a .deb file. The alien package manager works, most of the time, and it beats using cpio to extract the rpm file and repackage it as a deb.

      As for where the Java files go, they usually go under /usr/lib/java or /usr/lib/jre if I recall correctly.

      Alien is not going to fly as Debian is in the midst of moving Lenny out the door and this would first start in Experimental, then move to Unstable/Sid, which need to make sure they are lintian clean. I'm going to file a reportbug on this with the owners of openjdk-6 and get this moving into an update to the openjdk-6 all around.

  9. OpenJDK already 64-bit by thule · · Score: 4, Informative

    The article implied that IcedTea (OpenJDK) is already 64-bit. My system reports the plugin as a 64-bit shared object. This release from Sun just makes it part of the official Sun Java download.


    $ rpm -ql java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin-1.6.0.0-7.b12.fc10.x86_64

    /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so

    $ file /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so

    /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped

  10. Re:Developers section red now ? by thrillseeker · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't get it.

  11. Re:128 bit computing is around the corner by corsec67 · · Score: 4, Funny

    My Intel processor claims that 63.99 bits should be enough for everybody.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
  12. already have other options by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What already works for me on 64-bit Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex is this:

    apt-get install openjdk-6-jre openjdk-6-jdk icedtea-gcjwebplugin

    Sun has always made it a royal pain to use their java. For years they've always wrapped everything in click-through licenses, so you couldn't just download it and install it using your distro's packaging system. This version seems like more of the same, or maybe even worse. I went to the java.net page linked to from the article, downloaded the file. It's a shell script, and when you run it, the first thing it does is print out a license and ask if you agree to it. Some of the contents of the license:

    • 3.1 Licensee may not duplicate Licensed Software other than for a single copy of Licensed Software for archival purposes only.
    • 3.3 Except as otherwise provided by law, Licensee may not modify or create derivative works of the Licensed Software, or reverse engineer, disassemble or decompile binary portions of the Licensed Software, or otherwise attempt to derive the source code from such portions.
    • 3.5 Licensee shall have no right to use the Licensed Software for productive or commercial use.
    • 6.1 This Agreement will commence on the date on which Licensee receives Licensed Software (the "Effective Date") and will expire twelve (12) months from the Effective Date, unless terminated earlier as provided herein.
    • 6.2 Either party may terminate this Agreement upon ten (10) days' written notice to the other party.

    So in other words, it's not open source under the Open Source Definition.

    I think it's great that Sun has GPL'd their implementation of java. Three cheers for Sun for doing that. But they've proved over and over again that any open-source project they control will have a closed development process, will ignore their user community, and will be a massive pain to install and work with. So the really good thing about Sun GPLing their version of java is that now, finally, we've gotten to the point where people other than Sun -- people who Get It about open source -- can take the ball and run with it.

  13. Re:Developers section red now ? by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, if it were running on 64-bit java instead of 64-bit perl, it wouldn't - java ints are still only 32 bits in "64 bit java.

    Someone forgot to future-proof their language. 10 years from now, when you're running a 128-bit cpu with a quarter-terrabyte of ram, those 32-bit signed ints are going to look mighty quaint. "What do you mean, I can't store the [file size|number of inodes|ipv6 address|whatever] in a 128-bit int? What do you mean, 128-bit java doesn't have 128-bit ints? You're shitting me, right? This is 2018 ... what's gonna happen in 2038 - we gonna have a 2k38 java problem? No? Why should I believe you? You can't even right-size your ints ..."

  14. The source was out there for years! by mi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unlike Flash, Java source-code was perfectly open and available for years (it has even been GPL-ed for a while, but before that was still available). Why did anyone have to wait for Sun to release the 64-bit plugin instead of compiling one? A fairly small patch was required (long vs. size_t somewhere deep inside)...

    FreeBSD was providing Java (with the plugin) for both i386 and amd64 for years now...

    What does the fact, that this is news, tell us about Linux developers? First they holler at Sun to release the source, that's already available for download under GPL. And then they still would not touch it, until Sun gets around to it... "Freedom to tinker" my behind.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  15. That's a good thing - trust me by Weaselmancer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Write some stuff in C#/.NET sometime. Especially the embedded version. You'll see why. Every time MS puts out some patch...stuff breaks. Why? Because they do crap like this.

    I have an embedded platform that has the .NET 2.0 binaries on it, as well as a 3.5 version. And I had to hack that one in from binaries from Visual Studio manually. The 2.0 binaries don't run on 3.5. The 3.5 binaries don't run on 2.0. It *sucks*.

    So - if you suddenly doubled the size of an int it would break backwards compatibility and do this sort of horrible crap to Java. People who use java 1.2-1.6 would need their 32 bit ints. If you wanted the same box to run your 64 bit int Java, you'd need two sets of binaries. And a way to switch between them.

    Trust me, you don't actually want this.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:That's a good thing - trust me by thtrgremlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Either int will be a fixed size and longer ints will have another name, or you can explicitly state the size of int as a declaration. This has always been done and 'good coding' should include explicit declaration. It is when people cut corners and use "what works" that can quickly create regression bugs when backwards compatibility is integrated, but you didn't follow good coding guidelines. "That always worked fine suddenly stopped working" issue. This is also why a lot of those "bugs" don't get fixed.

      People need to follow proper coding guidelines, not try to stop things from progressing. Programming has always been progressive in this way, and just relearning the new way has never been much of a way to keep up.

      --
      Want Big Business out of government? Take away the incentive and start by getting government out of big business!