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."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
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.
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.
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.
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;
obviously you need to reinstall... with 128-bits Linux...
"I think this line is mostly filler"
""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"
Makes a change, most people around here are joke blind.
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.
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
$ file /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so
I don't get it.
My Intel processor claims that 63.99 bits should be enough for everybody.
If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
What already works for me on 64-bit Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex is this:
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:
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.
Find free books.
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 ..."
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.
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.