Canonical To Remove Sun Java From Repositories, Users' Machines

New submitter an_orphan writes "Apparently, Oracle's 'Operating System Distributor License for Java' is expired, causing Ubuntu to not only remove sun-java from the partner repository, but from user's machines."

Comments

"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

Canonical is the new Apple.

Re:"from user's machines"

[rtfa-troll]

The difference is that automatic updates are optional for Ubuntu, so if you've turned them on you have already opted in to Canonical managing your system. This is especially true because in this case there are security reasons to remove the packages.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

What "difference" are you talking about? There are *no* automatic updates on Apple stuff (OSX or iOS) - you have to agree to them each time. Please stop trolling about things you clearly don't know anything about.

Re:"from user's machines"

[grumling]

You could argue that by putting in your password when update manager asks for it, you are agreeing to let Canonical update your machine.

Re:"from user's machines"

[tixxit]

Will it be removed from the user's machine, or just (I'm going to guess not-so-sliently) "upgraded" to OpenJDK? I'm suspecting the latter. I'll bet there is a big box that comes up, warns the user Oracle's Java is being replaced, and that if they choose not to upgrade, that no new security updates will be forthcoming. Frankly, the bad press from replacing Java is probably better than the bad press that would've come had they left an insecure, non-updateable version of the JVM on all their releases.

Re:"from user's machines"

[rtfa-troll]

What "difference" are you talking about? There are *no* automatic updates on Apple stuff (OSX or iOS) - you have to agree to them each time. Please stop trolling about things you clearly don't know anything about.

The OP is talking about Apple's ability to remote kill applications for security reasons (already demonstrated on iOS, presumably coming soon on OS/X). This comes from itunes, bypasses all need for acknowlegements and has nothing to do with software updates. I will leave you to stew in the irony of your last sentence.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Targen]

While I love to bash on Ubuntu on every (reasonable and merited) opportunity available, and they certainly aren't scarce, this isn't one of them. As others have already pointed out, the packages were removed because Oracle will not license updates, and the latest distributable version has important security vulnerabilities. It would be irresponsible to keep the current packages in the distribution and illegal to update them.

More importantly, this move is exactly what Oracle wants done, and no, it's not any sort of evil move. Dalibor Topic explains in his blog the reasons behind this change in licensing: OpenJDK is (the basis of) the reference implementation for Java 7, and the Sun (now Oracle) JDK implementation is now (going to be) based on OpenJDK; the gratis, non-free licensing for the Sun (now Oracle) JDK was a temporary solution that's reached the end of its applicability:

That non-open-source license was introduced by Sun Microsystems back in 2006, when the open-sourcing of Sun's Java SE implementation was announced at JavaOne, as a stop-gap measure until OpenJDK matured. It was a way to enable Linux distributions to take Sun's JDK 5.0 and provide their own 'native packages' based on Sun's non-open-source bits.

It was always intended to be a temporary solution, and the final solution has always been migrating to OpenJDK. Yeah, it sucks, compatibility is far from complete, and things will break as a result of this move, but it's always been the plan, and it's not Canonical fucking it up this time. For reference, as one of the comments in TFA points out, Debian did it too.

In short: nothing to see here; move along. If this makes you lose sleep, maybe you shouldn't have used Java, and maybe you should migrate to something better.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

No, they're just going to remove it. If you want OpenJDK, you have to install that by hand.

For almost all users, OpenJDK is just fine and is the one to use. (e.g. any Java plugins in the browser, almost any Java app). Anyone who is affected by this went to some effort to install Sun Java by hand specifically.

Re:"from user's machines"

[amiga3D]

And you'd be correct because that's exactly what you are doing. If you want control of the updates use synaptic and you can pick and choose which updates to install. Now that I think about it you may well be able to refuse individual actions with update manager as well. Generally I just look it over and see if anything is objectionable but have never actually denied any action before.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Thomas Charron]

Software which someones tested and released under a given JDK was generally using it for a reason. I can, for one, specifically say that a project I'm working on will specifically *not* run under the OpenJDK.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no new "Apple". There are the Gates, the Jobs and the Wozniaks. They can all go bad in their own way. Just look at Microsoft, Apple and Google. It isn't the camp you belong to, but your goal and size.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

Yep. Been there, done that.

The problem is that proprietary software is generally badly-written rubbish, well below the typical quality of open source (and many studies have shown this). However, many companies still run proprietary software, and being terrible rubbish with no peer-review it's often only certified against specific versions of Java and will actually break with any other version. Heck, one package we're stuck with was only certified against Sun Java 6 a few months ago, and Java 5 was EOLed end 2009!

tl;dr proprietary software, being shit, can be very platform-specific.

Re:"from user's machines"

[toriver]

"Already demonstrated" how? To my knowledge, NO app has ever been remotely killed on iOS, though they have said they have the ability to do so. However, both Amazon Kindle (with the unlicensed "1984" edition) and Google (repeatedly to nuke apps that turned out to be trojans) have done so.

Re:"from user's machines"

[rec9140]

"For almost all users, OpenJDK is just fine and is the one to use. (e.g. any Java plugins in the browser, almost any Java app). Anyone who is affected by this went to some effort to install Sun Java by hand specifically."

Wrong. OJDK is broken, and my software that I use daily doesn't and has never worked on it.

As for installing REAL Java by hand and alot of effort.

Nope. Came with my distro KMint, aka Linux Mint KDE (now defunct)

My new distro Julep, added a PPA, apt-get install and done.

Bad move canoncial, bad bad bad....

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

My colleagues are proud that they managed to get their enterprise app migrated to Java 5, some other projects are still stuck with 1.4.

Re:"from user's machines"

[BradleyUffner]

The difference is that automatic updates are optional for Ubuntu, so if you've turned them on you have already opted in to Canonical managing your system.

Right, Good when Linux does it, Bad when Windows does it. Got it.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

"In short: nothing to see here; move along. If this makes you lose sleep, maybe you shouldn't have used Java, and maybe you should migrate to something better."

Like Windows, apparently.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

HP iLO2 (and possibly iLO3) and HP Virtual Rooms do not wok with OpenJDK at all, and you have to specifically install the Sun JRE. If Ubuntu remove the Sun JRE on my machine, they make it impossible for me to do my job.

Re:"from user's machines"

[rtfa-troll]

"Already demonstrated" how? To my knowledge, NO app has ever been remotely killed on iOS, though they have said they have the ability to do so. However, both Amazon Kindle (with the unlicensed "1984" edition) and Google (repeatedly to nuke apps that turned out to be trojans) have done so.

It's been demonstrated by the guy who found the URL for doing it. I'm not sure if he had to add a fake root certificate to the phone to do it though. I also thought they had done it with the fake driving license app but I can't find a way to prove that even after having searched hard so you are probably right and I should have been clearer and Apple has never actually used this feature for its intended use.

Re:"from user's machines"

[tomhudson]

Well, you're going to have a problem in the future, because Oracle is replacing Sun's Java with OpenJDK. It's going to be the "real" java from now on. The summary, like usual, left this important fact out.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

Then those distros are now either violating Oracle's licence on its proprietary software or distributing packages with known security holes with known exploits in the wild. I'm not entirely convinced either of those is a good idea.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

(shudder) I feel their pain.

Re:"from user's machines"

[interval1066]

...maybe you shouldn't have used Java...

Nice. As you said, there's really nothing to see here. But the "maybe you shouldn't have used Java" comment irks me. I for one would like to see Linux gain more traction in UserLand, and comments that blame the user are stupid and short sighted. You know perfectly well that any applications that depend on Java and suddenly break are not the user's fault. I refuse to even entertain the notion that Linux user's everywhere will need to start carefully auditing their apps to make sure those apps tow the line for compatibility.Its hard enough just getting them to use the platform.

Re:"from user's machines"

[mysidia]

There are *no* automatic updates on Apple stuff (OSX or iOS) - you have to agree to them each time.

Starting with Mac OS v10.7 Lion, updates are done behind the scenes, fully automated. Agreeing to each update is a thing of the past

Re:"from user's machines"

[LVSlushdat]

Oh.. This is just fuckin' peachy.. I have a bunch of users I support on 10.04 who have a Java app that requires Sun/OracleSE RTE 1.6.. We tried to get it to work on OpenJDK, no dice.. Anybody else with apps like this are going to be REALLY pissed if they have "install security w/o confirmation". Anybody know if you have it set to download only, if this will remove sun-jre? Fuckin' Canonical....

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

It was that or negotiate to give Oracle money. That'll never happen.

In further news, it turns out that proprietary software is utter shit that's full of traps.

Re:"from user's machines"

[infinitelink]

One can refuse specific updates from the update manager. I scroll through the list and choose which updates I do and do not want based on information published as to stability and functionality. If some problem has been discovered, I wait a while until a fix is released. This means of course being slightly behind in regard to updates, but generally speaking I do not install things like Java in a browser, I disable scripts, block fetches from other domains, and avoid risky websites (or lock everything down first), thus don't have too many issues. Of course I am not important, and nobody forces me to use some site or service in pursuit of business as many encounter, but the same goes for a lot of the ordinary users of distros like Ubuntu, who use it because it works well enough they do not have to fiddle with it.

I would be surprised if many of them ever updated their systems since, after all, "it works" (if installed correctly): I installed for my father when he made the mistake of getting a Vista machine when that OS was first released, and when the computer died returned him to Windows due to requirements of business software he is familiar with, and he hates it now ("everything is slow"). The entire time he was on Linux he did not update because things "just worked", so adding No Script and configuring it to the sites he uses regularly was very important, and hitting the system whenever I visited was also. As far ordinary users go, perhaps it would be advisable for the nerdier folk to set up SSH or VLC on family members' systems, lock things down, and tunnel-in whenever they screw things up? Making them dependent not on commercial vendors, but family, and teaching and quizing them constantly might raise the general competence with these machines a little, if done tactfully: "it says I have an update, but I don't know the password", "I'll log-in now and help"; it also might lead to more of us ("the family computer go-to guy's") blowing our brains out though...

Re:"from user's machines"

[jimicus]

I just checked the 10.7 laptop I'm typing on. Checking for and downloading the updates is automatic, actually installing them is something you get prompted to do and there is no tick box to say "Don't bother me, just do it".

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

True! After all the only people in the GPL world that deserve to get paid are Canonical and the FSF every one else can go pound sand.

Re:"from user's machines"

[X0563511]

I'm curious. What specifically is lacking in OpenJDK that causes your project to be incompatible? Finding out from someone who's been-there-done-that is much preferable to hitting that specific brick wall yourself.

I had thought it was only a few things that were different - sound (fixed), serial IO (fixed... I thought) for example.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

Nor has any app ever been remotely killed on Ubuntu. FUD much?

Re:"from user's machines"

[Sipper]

No, they're just going to remove it. If you want OpenJDK, you have to install that by hand.

I don't think the Debian pacakge management system has support to allow Cononical to force remove a package. [At least AFAIK.] It's much more likely that what they'll do is modify the control file for OpenJDK with "replaces: sun-java-6" so that any installation of OpenJDK will replace Sun Java6, but that still won't force an installation of OpenJDK to cause the replacement to ocurr. And it's very unlikely for Cononical to mark the OpenJDK pacakge as "essential", and AFAIK that's the only way that a forced installation of OpenJDK could happen.

All other free software distributions are having to remove Sun Java6 from their repositories due to the same licensing problems, so the fact that Ubuntu had to do this too wasn't unexpected.

Re:"from user's machines"

[viperidaenz]

How did Steve Wozniak go bad?

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they're just going to remove it. If you want OpenJDK, you have to install that by hand.

People keep wondering why Linux stubbornly refuses to take off with everyday users. This is why. Ubuntu, the single distro most famous for usability, is automatically removing a critical component and not automatically replacing it, nor even (as far as I can tell) automatically presenting an option to replace it. You have to figure out that it needs doing and then do it by hand. Why?

Re:"from user's machines"

[tqk]

But the "maybe you shouldn't have used Java" comment irks me. I for one would like to see Linux gain more traction in UserLand, and comments that blame the user are stupid and short sighted.

I suspect that comment was directed at developers, not users. I've often wondered how java got such traction among devs. I don't know any who actually enjoy using it. Their stories sound a lot like those told by Cobol programmers ("Things to do today: write code, write code, write code, ...").

Re:"from user's machines"

[rtfa-troll]

Nor has any app ever been remotely killed on Ubuntu. FUD much?

Not just that no app has been killed by Ubuntu, but if you switch don't opt in to automatic updates then Ubuntu doesn't even have the ability to do remote kills without your agreement, which, despite the fanbois moderation of my above post, has been confirmed to exist by Steve Jobs himself.

Re:"from user's machines"

[jo_ham]

That's not true. I have a Lion system right here and it's not an option.

You can have Software Update fetch updates in the background automatically and let you know when they are downloaded, but it *absolutely does not* install them automatically. You *must* authenticate with an admin account first.

You can turn off background downloading too, it's merely a convenience factor.

Re:"from user's machines"

[interval1066]

I've often wondered how java got such traction among devs.

There's some merit to what you say. As a developer I've found it to be pretty frustrating at times; trying to keep the jvm's classpath strait alone is sometimes challenging with a complex web app. But once you get everything set up and packaged in a war file its pretty cool. The JMS is worth the trouble in my opinion, if your building a distributed app.

Re:"from user's machines"

[cyber-vandal]

Who told you this? Last time there were updates for my Lion machine it informed me that updates were available and offered me the choice of whether or not to install them. If you don't have a Lion machine why bother to post about how it works?

Re:"from user's machines"

[Eunuchswear]

It's difficult to overstate the irony here.

platform specific Java software.

Zow.

You know how much shit we went through to avoid this kind of situation with Fortran/Cobol/Algol back in the 70's and 80's?

Re:"from user's machines"

[jedidiah]

Time to "support" them by showing them how to have their own local repository. That will nicely avoid this particular problem as well as ensuring that they always have the means to recreate their currently deployed machines.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost all users apparently doesnt include the set of Android developers.

Re:"from user's machines"

[ohnocitizen]

What studies are these? Oh THOSE studies, the unlinked kind that bolster your argument without being rude enough to be checked for bias, method, or even to see if the conclusion matches your claims. Some open source software is better than proprietary, but the reverse can be just as true. Especially when you consider that for different types of projects, one might prefer one or the other. I'm no fan of Oracle, but to claim that this software is rubbish is a bit foolish, and not the point. The point is for Ubuntu to be removing this from user's systems, when those users might depend on it (and thus breaking their other software/projects) - is another mark against Ubuntu.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Xtifr]

Then you can install Oracle's Java (there is no "Sun Java" any more) yourself. Oracle no longer allows Canonical to distribute updates, and the last version that Canonical was allowed to distribute has security bugs. Canonical won't prevent you from installing any flavor of Java (or any other piece of software) by yourself, but they're not going to stick you with an insecure, buggy package that has no upgrade path, and they're out of other options. If you want to bitch, bitch at Oracle for their boneheaded move.

BTW, OpenJDK has been improving by leaps and bounds. Unless you tried your project w/in the last few months, you might be surprised. For that matter, this move by Oracle is going to affect more companies than Canonical. (Singling out Canonical for the slashdot article's focus was pretty silly). RH, SUSE and Debian are either dropping or have already dropped Oracle Java as well. They have to--the license requires it. Thus, OpenJDK is going to be getting a lot more attention from those companies/organizations and from Enterprise users who depend on those companies' products. If it doesn't support your product now, it may well within a surprisingly short amount of time.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

Java has long been known to be the new Cobol. Win32 will be the other new Cobol.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

If you have Sun Java, rather than OpenJDK, it's because you put it there.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

Coverity, for example. And note they're doing these studies with the aim of selling Coverity to proprietary software houses.

While anyone can pick counterexamples to a measured tendency, only someone with terrible reasoning skills would think they constitute a disproof.

I appreciate the desire for links, but it's really hard to believe you've followed open source at all in the past five years without being even slightly aware of this stuff; it shows sufficient intellectual laziness that you can do other Google searches yourself. You make me realise that leading a horse to clues isn't necessarily going to make him think. It's like arguing with a creationist and having to compress a degree in biology into a few sentences on the spot.

Re:"from user's machines"

[David Gerard]

They apparently plan to replace it with an empty package.

Re:"from user's machines"

[gstrickler]

For new distributions, you're correct. However, disabling/removing them from existing installations with the express consent of the user is "malware-like behavior".

Re:"from user's machines"

[gl4ss]

It's difficult to overstate the irony here.

platform specific Java software.

Zow.

You know how much shit we went through to avoid this kind of situation with Fortran/Cobol/Algol back in the 70's and 80's?

well, the more "cool" programming paradigms you're going to use, the more likely it is that your stuff won't "just work" when moved to another vm.

but I'm a bit puzzled how you can make java not port? rely on reflection too much? or using shitty support classes? relying on crap frameworks which rely on reflection and certain file-systems? I mean, most of the things introduced to java aren't _necessary_ at all. a lot of times I think things were better if even enterprise related things were coded with java in a fashion that would let the classes run in even a j2me vm - most of the time there's no reason why it couldn't be written so.

(I do think that annotations are cruft or garbage in java)

Re:"from user's machines"

[togofspookware]

I suspect that comment was directed at developers, not users. I've often wondered how java got such traction among devs. I don't know any who actually enjoy using it. Their stories sound a lot like those told by Cobol programmers ("Things to do today: write code, write code, write code, ...").

* Build a JAR file
* Anyone with Java installed can run it

Is why. And the JVM is a pretty solid platform. I'm not a huge fan of the language itself, but no other platform comes close in terms of simplicity of development and deployment.

Re:"from user's machines"

[LizardKing]

As someone who has to support Java applications (with Swing based front ends) on Windows, Mac OS X, and various Unix flavours I can say with some confidence that OpenJDK is as good as an Oracle branded Java runtime, and better than an IBM branded one. We (meaning my employer) support our apps on IBM's Java runtime when OpenJSDK isn't an option, but our preference is now Oracle's releases or OpenJDK with no real preference for either. The significant thing is that only a year ago this wasn't the case - we considered Oracle's releases to be the preferred platform over OpenJDK. Since then, we have seen no bug reports that have turned out to be down to bugs in OpenJDK that didn't exist in Oracle's releases. Of course if you're fucking about and using unpublished API's from the com.sun packages, then that would explain your claim to not support OpenJDK, but then by definition of what is a "certified Java application", if you are using such API's then you have no reason to complain that your apps don't work as expected under OpenJDK.

Re:"from user's machines"

[LizardKing]

Wrong. OJDK is broken, and my software that I use daily doesn't and has never worked on it.

Please provide stack traces. I work on code that exercises some fairly remote corners of the Java language and library classes, including some pretty hardcore reflection based stuff, but haven't been bitten by a difference between Sun/Oracle Java and OpenJDK for more than a year.

Re:"from user's machines"

[LizardKing]

I've often wondered how java got such traction among devs.

Perhaps because it came out at a time when the alternative was fucking about with non-standard compliant C++ implementations and crufty abstraction libraries. I remember downloading a beta of what was to be Java 1.0 (yeah, I suppose I should feel old, except I don't), and thinking that this is what I'd wanted Tcl/Tk or Perl and the Tk module to be - a truly cross platform language and libraries that allowed me to quickly write apps with support for sockets and a GUI.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Thomas Charron]

We've spent too much money verifying the software which was NOT testing under OpenJDK.

Re:"from user's machines"

[gstrickler]

Of course, I meant "...without express consent..."

Re:"from user's machines"

[Sipper]

They apparently plan to replace it with an empty package.

Huh! Ewww. That... kinda sucks, as it would break machines unless the empty package also has a dependency on OpenJDK to cause it to be installed. I guess a temporary "fix" would be to put a HOLD on the current Sun Java6 package if you really want to keep it. That probably won't work forever, though, because eventually the other packages may have a dependency on OpenJDK unless they continue the virtual package dependency that is currently used at least in Debian.

If they actually do go to that length then they must be desperate to see Java6 de-installed... maybe for licensing/monetary reasons? I've never seen an empty package put in place of a real one before like this.

Re:"from user's machines"

[KagakuNinja]

What I remember from accidentally using OpenJDK a few years ago... Apache Tomcat, one of the most popular servlet containers, did not work with OpenJDK. The first thing I do with any Linux server is remove OpenJDK and install the latest Sun (now Oracle) version of Java.

I don't know what the incompatibility was, and maybe they have fixed it by now. But I don't care enough about "freedom" to bother with OpenJDK.

Re:"from user's machines"

[mysidia]

Who told you this? Last time there were updates for my Lion machine it informed me that updates were available and offered me the choice of whether or not to install them.

It's details of MacOS Lion

that have been well published that MacOS Lion has automated security updates. Some updates require approval.

This doesn't preclude the possibility of Apple installing other security updates to installed apps without approval in the future, or of removing 'banned' apps entirely (supposing Apple deemed the app to be bad, or in violation of Apple's policies for the Mac app store).

Do you think they are reserving rights to do so in the EULA, for no reason?

Re:"from user's machines"

[Rary]

Well, you're going to have a problem in the future, because Oracle is replacing Sun's Java with OpenJDK. It's going to be the "real" java from now on. The summary, like usual, left this important fact out.

Almost right, but not quite. As I understand it, Sun's (now Oracle's) JDK will still exist, but it will no longer be the Reference Implementation. OpenJDK will become the Reference Implementation.

This does, of course, mean that OpenJDK will be the "real" Java, and that there should (in theory) be no differences between Oracle JDK and OpenJDK— and if there are differences, then it's Oracle JDK that's wrong. But Oracle's JDK will still exist.

Re:"from user's machines"

[gmhowell]

How did Steve Wozniak go bad?

Having sex with Kathy Griffin.

Re:"from user's machines"

[Anonymous Coward]

I do the same for Android development. Also, my preferred IDE for python, pyCharm, throws all the bells and sirens about using the real java when I try to launch it using openjdk. So I don't fight it.

Re:"from user's machines"

[WOOFYGOOFY]

Can you be more specific about what the problem is you're having?

Re:"from user's machines"

[Gr8Apes]

I think you're discussing Mac App Store functionality, not the OS functionality.

Now, for Mac App Store to do this, I believe it must be started. I don't recall the specifics of whether the removal is forced or requires authentication, and AFAIK, it doesn't affect your ability to restore from time machine nor other backups. So honestly, it sounds a little far-fetched and useless to me.

Re:"from user's machines"

[toriver]

I fail to see where I mentioned Ubuntu. Can you point out where I spread any FUD in my short paragraph?

Re:"from user's machines"

[toriver]

Noone denies it exists. However, it has not been used. You probably have a knife in your kitchen that can be used to kill with, but unless you actually do so it is not a murder weapon.

Re:"from user's machines"

[rtfa-troll]

In that kind of analogy, this is not a knife, but a remote controlled shotgun which is disguised as a decoration. When you moved into the house nobody told you about it. When you spot it and ask about it you are told not to worry; it's a pest control device.

To be honest I don't have a problem with this as such. However, a) Apple needs to make a standard way to turn it off without jailbreaking your phone and b) they need to tell people about it upfront. If they have nothing to be embarrassed about then it shouldn't hurt them to explain the feature openly.

Is this April first?

[reedk]

WTF? I'm no fan of Java (we all know the logo is coffee because you have time to get some while your app loads), but this is another challenge for the Linux desktop.

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

In what way?
It being a challenge for the linux dextop?
or java being so slow that it's standard practice to build in a progress bar so people don't think the program is hanging?

Re:Is this April first?

[Yvanhoe]

On Linux, most java developers consider that OpenJDK is the default implementation and that Sun JDK is more or less discontinued.

OpenJDK is a GPL release of Sun's code. It is the official Java (SE) implementation :

http://blogs.oracle.com/henrik/entry/moving_to_openjdk_as_the

Re:Is this April first?

[grumbel]

This is what you get when you have infrastructure that is build around one centrally maintained dependency tree, you are slave to whatever decisions they make. It's not even a new problem, similar software removals against the users will have happened with Gnome2 vs Gnome3 and even back with Gnome1 vs Gnome2 and counterless times when a working version of Gimp was replaced with a broken one and only fixed month later. This one seems a bit more sinister as from the looks of it it seems they remove it in a regular software update, not a dist-upgrade, but it's essentially the same issue. And to all those "This isn't a problem"-sayers, the existence of complicated time consuming workarounds by manual compilation/installation, thus by-passing the binary package distribution, is part of the problem, not the solution.

It should really be time for Debian to move to a more flexible, more free form of package distribution that doesn't depend on a single dependency tree and fixed locations in the file system.

Re:Is this April first?

[dotancohen]

On Linux, most java developers consider that OpenJDK is the default implementation and that Sun JDK is more or less discontinued.

And yet, a customer that I used to support has an app that will not run on OpenJDK, only on Sun Java. I do not know if it is sniffing the JVM or if it makes use of an undocumented feature AKA bug but it won't even load with OpenJDK. No, I don't have the source.

Re:Is this April first?

[Yetihehe]

Red5 hangs more often on openjdk ;)

Re:Is this April first?

[Splab]

Same experience for me; OpenJDK just doesn't work.

Re:Is this April first?

[David Gerard]

Bet it's a subtle bug that only works because of implementation-specific behaviour. We just got bitten by one of those, relating to different behaviour between Sun Java 6 on Solaris SPARC and Sun Java 6 on Linux. Never trust, always verify!

Re:Is this April first?

[amiga3D]

Well there is always Linux from Scratch.

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/

Have fun!

Re:Is this April first?

[ElmoGonzo]

Java did run kinda slow on my old Win95 box but my current Unix and Win7 systems don't display this behavior. Sounds to me like you're living in the past or need a hardware upgrade.

Re:Is this April first?

[Trepidity]

The single, centrally-managed, integration-tested and conflict-resolved tree is sort of the main advantage of Debian, though. I can see alternate possibilities, but they would be quite different models for distribution management.

Compared to the situation on, say, OSX (which I use more often these days), what I like about Debian's one tree is that there's less buck-passing. If it's in Debian, it's a bug somewhere in Debian. I might've reported it to the wrong package, but then the maintainer will usually reassign it to the right one, not just throw up their hands and say, "sorry, not our bug" like you get with reporting bugs to Apple. Sometimes they'll forward the bugs upstream and wait for a resolution, but they'll also try to figure out how to mitigate impact or incompatibilities locally, if possible. I'm not sure how you could maintain that working structure without the single tree.

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking idiot. The only thing that gets removed is the java browser plugin. Everything else remains until the user either decides to replace it with OpenJDK, or download and install Oracle's updated JRE/JDK. Your tired, insipid rant against Debian's packaging system is beside the point.

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

It should really be time for Debian to move to a more flexible, more free form of package distribution that doesn't depend on a single dependency tree and fixed locations in the file system.

You're absolutely right! We should have packages which install their libraries wherever they feel like, leading to 20 different versions of the same library on the computer in different places, with no clear way of knowing which one is going to get loaded when you run your program.

We could call it

DLL HELL

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lock the package? Or you can always use manually install either way. I do not like the way it was handled however it is clear you do not understand the apt system. This problem would not occur on Debian/GPL system unless you specifically chose to install software from a NON-FREE or Commercial Repository.

Re:Is this April first?

[fast turtle]

and this is why as a business user, I wont use Ubunta/Debian/Name your distro. If I am going to run Linux on my network, it will be based on LFS and PXE booting with smart terminals (what's a smart terminal?).

A Smart terminal is not a thin client. It includes all of the basic hardware that a normal desktop has except for drives. All storage is on the server, thus a system that dies is simply replaced with a working unit, the person logs back on and they're back to work in minutes. Another advantage is that this allows the complete control of the users desktop, meaning my users don't have the ability to install any software that's not authorized/needed/licensed and all of their work is backed up properly.

The only caveat/issue we encountered during the roll out was localized network overloading. To solve it, we increased all terminals to 8GB from 2GB, thus reducing the level of network traffic (prohibitive cost to upgrade that infrastructre). Our network utilization is now lower then XP was using and we've eliminated many of the problems we had with Windows. Keep in mind that we've been able to do nothing about stupidity, so don't think Linux will cure/fix that issue for you.

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenJDK didn't implement the full java spec when it was released. There were proprietary bits that couldn't be opensourced. I can't find a reference, but I know that 2d graphics was an issue. It also looks like that maybe as of openJDK 7, these issues are resolved? I don't know, again, I couldn't find a good reference to link to.

Re:Is this April first?

[chrb]

/etc/apt/sources.list has supported multiple repositories forever. Commonly used alternative external repositories include medibuntu (codecs etc.) and skype. If you really want to set up an external repository for the Sun JDK, nobody is stopping you (apart from Oracle). The only viable alternative to the repository system is to either 1) package all the dependencies with each app, or 2) pull source code from external sites and resolve dependencies at compile time. Solution 1) has obvious problems of duplicating resources. Solution 2) is the Gentoo way, which is fine for some, but it inevitably leads to multiple systems with different dependencies, and different compile time options, which can make some bugs difficult to reproduce.

Re:Is this April first?

[jedidiah]

I wonder just what Java "killer apps" for the desktop you think will be impacted by this.

It's just like .Net and Adobe Air.

Why should I care. Mindless hysterics just aren't that compelling.

Re:Is this April first?

[jedidiah]

Packages shouldn't be installing anything except in their own personal space, much like a Mac.

So does MacOS have "DLL Hell" now?

If you need a particular library and you are willing to put it where you are allowed to installed (shouldn't be in of the usual places, bad security) then it shouldn't impact anyone else.

Packages "installing their own libraries" into the root-owned part of the system is the Windows way.

Re:Is this April first?

[togofspookware]

Java apps tend to be slow because a lot of 'standard practices' (which could be more accurately called 'n00b practices') encourage inefficient constructs.

If you know what the heck you're doing, you can write very snappy programs in Java. Otherwise your apps are going to suck regardless.

Re:Is this April first?

[grumbel]

DLL HELL

Yeah, that's bad and Linux has it's analog "dependency hell", which is just as much of a problem.

A package manager that is more flexible then what we have right now could fix that and no, that doesn't mean libraries would fly everywhere, it simply would mean that it would have more advanced mechanisms to resolve naming conflicts then forcing you to always use the newest package from the repository and nothing else, which is what current package managers do.

Re:Is this April first?

[grumbel]

/etc/apt/sources.list has supported multiple repositories forever.

Multiple repositories don't address the underlying problem, as you are still installing everything in a single dependency and filesystem tree. If you have two repository with packages of the same name, you have a conflict that current package managers have no proper way of dealing with, aside from forcing you to use whatever has the highest version number (i.e. the Gnome2 vs Gnome3 problem).

The only viable alternative to the repository system is to either

There are far more ways to solve the issue. You could for example start by separating software installation from software availability, i.e. copy files to /packages/foobar-2.0/bin/foobar instead of right into /usr/bin/foobar. And then just place a symlink/start-script in /usr/bin/ to make the software available. This allows users to have different versions of the same software. Libraries can be dealt with by adjusting the LD_LIBRARY_PATH on a per program level.

Re:Is this April first?

[CodeReign]

OpenJDKs are garbage pure snd simple. (Maybe not harmony) OpenJDK doesn't have anyhot spot nor can it handle Opengl. So useless for enterprise useless for games.

Re:Is this April first?

[Anonymous Coward]

Use JAD to decompile it. The resulting source will suck, but at least you will have a chance of determining what is wrong.

Re:Is this April first?

[ADRA]

You are crazy. I'm a Java developer, who uses Linux, and I'd neer consider OpenJDK as any sort of alternative to SunJDK. Its pretty much the first thing I install on my Linux boxes. The Oracle/Sun supplied JRE is a lot more stable, and I'd assume is better performant as well.

Re:Is this April first?

[chrb]

You could for example start by separating software installation from software availability, i.e. copy files to /packages/foobar-2.0/bin/foobar instead of right into /usr/bin/foobar. And then just place a symlink/start-script in /usr/bin/ to make the software available.

Yes, the Stow package manager works a bit like this. There are downsides to the approach though, which is presumably why no one has released a full distribution based on this concept. As the number of library versions shared between applications decreases, the memory cost approaches that of static linking. You also have the problem of version management and complex relationships (e.g. multiple applications embed Python, but depend on different versioned libraries).

Re:Is this April first?

[gstoddart]

Another advantage is that this allows the complete control of the users desktop, meaning my users don't have the ability to install any software that's not authorized/needed/licensed and all of their work is backed up properly.

Ah, one size fits nobody. What an annoying model.

In my experience, the fully locked down desktop which nobody has any ability to install applications they use/need makes for a desktop that makes IT happy ... but is generally useless for the rest of the company unless your industry is predicated on a large number of people effectively doing clerical work.

I'm glad that at my current employer IT understand that they're there to serve the actual business users. Everyone gets a dual monitor machine by default, users are local admins on their machine ... they've mostly done away with the mindset of Mordac the Preventer in IT. IT is there to help you get your job done, not to tell you what you're allowed to do.

The department I'm in is the Information Services for the rest of the company (we're the DBAs, web team, storage, backup and all of the enterprise software ... a few step up from the desktop), and most of our clients are in charge of things worth tens or hundreds millions of dollars in revenue. The culture is much more about ensuring the business users have what they need ... we're there to keep everything going so the people who generate the actual revenue don't have any unnecessary hurdles. The last thing I need is for the guys that provision desktops to tell me that I can't install a tool that I need to meet a client obligation.

At the desktop level, that's just the most basic plumbing that connects you to everything else. That doesn't dictate to business what they "need" or are "allowed" to do ... It's just the starting point to connect to the mission critical stuff.

Companies that allow the guys who roll out desktops to dictate policy to people who generate millions in revenue suffer in the end. IT departments who treat the actual business users as secondary to their wishes ... well, they need a shorter leash in many cases.

Now, there may be some industries where the standardized, locked down desktop makes sense. But, in many, it's a model which just simply doesn't work -- you just end up with self important people in IT who think that they're in charge and seem to take some pleasure in telling you that you're not 'allowed' to do something.

Java is obsolete!

[For a Free Internet]

Java was always a huge fuckup of a language, with its balonulous lazily-typed variables and its snordoblulous memory "management" and flubriglated syntax. Only idiots use it, good riddance.

Re:Java is obsolete!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, you must be one of those IT Support shit stains that do nothing but reboot "your" user's machines for them.

Re:Java is obsolete!

[colinrichardday]

Odd, I always thought the syntax was snordoblulous and the memory management flubriglated.

An the point is?

[tibit]

To shoot oneself in the foot?! I just don't get it. Wouldn't Oracle want to have their platform deployed as widely as possible? Someone's asleep at the helm. Just like at the media companies. Seems some big corporations these days are like chicken running around headless...

Re:An the point is?

[cpghost]

That's oh so typical of Oracle, even before they swallowed up SUN. They don't want the unwashed masses to touch their products (Database, Solaris, SPARC, now Java?, ...). This elitist mentality was part of their DNA makeup from the very beginning.

Re:An the point is?

[Trepidity]

I think they've more or less given up on Java as a desktop platform, and are focusing on a mixture of enterprise (all that J2EE and Java Beans stuff) and mobile (hence the Google lawsuit).

Re:An the point is?

[GPLHost-Thomas]

Wouldn't Oracle want to have their platform deployed as widely as possible?

What Oracle wants is money, they don't care anything else. The new license forced Debian to stop distributing Oracle Java from the non-free repositories, I'm not surprised this happens to Canonical.

Re:An the point is?

[David Gerard]

I have ten years' Solaris experience. Oracle buying Sun was when I took my boss and my boss's boss aside and strongly put the case that we needed to get the hell off Solaris immediately and go to Linux. (That I was advocating against my own CV was persuasive in itself.)

We commissioned a new box (12-core x86) to run a proprietary Java app; Linux versus Solaris would have made no difference; but Oracle charged another £300 for one year's Solaris licensing when CentOS was free. I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE HELL THEY THINK THEY'RE DOING.

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

If only my friend would See The Light.
Things like this is why I absolutely despise Oracle with a passion. They are actually worse than Microsoft.
In fact, I'd go as far as saying I actually like some parts of Microsoft, even the IE team now since they seem to be pushing forwards in to actually supporting standards now.
Meanwhile, over at Oracle, "STOP USING OUR THINGS, WE DON'T LIKE YOU!"

Re:An the point is?

[amiga3D]

It's being replace by OpenJDK. It was planned to happen like this for years. This was planned obsolescence with a gradual move to OpenJDK. Their is no surprise here except for those who didn't know it was coming. The summary is inflammatory but if you read the article you see that this is nothing really.

Re:An the point is?

[xelah]

Except, of course, a lot of the enterprise business depends on Java clients on desktops to talk to all those J2EE servers. Hence, say, JavaFX.

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Oracle's doing FOSS a favor. User's can still run Sun-java on their system, but they'll be responsible for installation and updating, just like Windows users are. The problem with OpenJDK is that while users prefer to use Sun-java supplied by the distribution, development of the open source version is languishing on those parts necessary to provide feature parity with Oracle's version. Hopefully, Oracle's decision will cause FOSS to refocus it's attention on improving the open source version.

Re:An the point is?

[ae1294]

It's being replace by OpenJDK. It was planned to happen like this for years. This was planned obsolescence with a gradual move to OpenJDK. Their is no surprise here except for those who didn't know it was coming. The summary is inflammatory but if you read the article you see that this is nothing really.

Well the last time I tried OpenJDK with freenet it didn't work right. That was about a year ago. I wonder if that has been fixed. I guess I will find out.

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry dude, I know of a highly secretive website where you can get the java warez. Are your ready for it?

OK, here it is: java.com

Ta-dah! We'll show Oracle that they can't take their java away from us!

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had problems with OpenJDK more recently as well. No way I want to switch to it from Sun Java.

Re:An the point is?

[mrmeval]

I managed to get Eclipse to run on it and it's a huge load of java hog meat. Isn't freenet open source? You might pester them to either help fix openJDK or fix their software.

Re:An the point is?

[jedidiah]

It's not just Java. You can get Oracle's flagship database products like that. You've always been able to. They've been pretty permissive like that for pretty much forever.

Re:An the point is?

[jedidiah]

Some of that enterprise business even drive sales of Oracle database licenses. Anything Oracle does to screw around with Java is basically cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Even Oracle might have been better off with Sun as a separate entity.

Re:An the point is?

[Anne Thwacks]

Meanwhile, over at Oracle, "STOP USING OUR THINGS, WE DON'T LIKE YOU!"

And its only now you noticed? This has been their policy for years!

Re:An the point is?

[ultranova]

Well the last time I tried OpenJDK with freenet it didn't work right.

To be fair, many (most?) Freenet builds don't work right with any JRE. "Due to insufficient testing" is at the very top of the news page as of this writing. Hardly a surprise, seeing how Freenet is very much a work in progress, and has been for over a decade.

Re:An the point is?

[antdude]

You forgot a letter in your reply's title. ;)

Re:An the point is?

[ADRA]

Hell, 300 clams for a support license / year is penuts. CentOS gives you didly, besides patches if and when they decide it. Well, you may find that 300 a big damn deal, but for people making real money, the ability to get help and real assurance contractually is important. I wouldn't run my business on

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why didn't you consider Illumos, now pretty much all of the Solaris engineers have left Sun and are working for other companies on Illumos, it seems like it might be a better option for an ex-Solaris shop than Linux.

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

Really?!?! If your bosses are cool running a non-vendor supported OS in the enterprise, then you should have been off Solaris a long time ago. Your desire to stay on Solaris (or any OS that requires a support contract for that matter) cost your company a lot of money.

Re:An the point is?

[phorm]

Why not have the openjdk package tagged as a replacement to JRE then?

Re:An the point is?

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenJDK is 100 % compatible with Sun Java. There is no need to use Sun Java anymore as an end-user who just wants the plugin to work.

Bad summary!

[xavdeman]

From the article: "Oracle, in retiring the ‘Operating System Distributor License for Java’, means Canonical no longer have permission to distribute the package." So it's not that Oracle has lost their right to distribute Java (JDK) or something, but they are retiring the license Canonical is using that granted them the right to distribute it with Ubuntu. The summary also states (correctly) that Ubuntu will remove the sun-java package from the repository and user's machines, but does not state why: “Due to the severity of the security risk, Canonical is immediately releasing a security update for the Sun JDK browser plugin which will disable the plugin on all machines.” Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers wrote in a mail to the Ubuntu Security Mailing list. “This will mitigate users’ risk from malicious websites exploiting the vulnerable version of the Sun JDK.” Summarizing: there are two things going on here, one is that Oracle has revoked the license Canonical is using to distribute Java (JDK) freely so it will not come with Ubuntu anymore. Java must now be downloaded from Oracle's site. Second: The java jdk package will be removed from user's computers because of severe security holes. Java must now be downloaded from Oracle's site. So, two things, one article and one terrible summary.

Re:Bad summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenJDK is still the default, and still distributed. And like TFA pointed out, the Sun/Oracle version is old and has security issues anyway.

Re:Bad summary!

[Nerdfest]

The unfortunate part is that there seem to be some applications that only seem to like "Sun Java v6" that comes from the repositories. I've tried the manual install of Java 7 from oracle, and Open JDK and neither work for them. I may have to leave the exploitable version installed just to use this software (and only this software, hopefully).

Re:Bad summary!

[David Gerard]

Remove the distro package, do the fiddling about to hand-install from the Oracle tarball for Sun Java 6 latest. We're doing something similar at work. (Well, I'll be handrolling a deb for internal maintainability, but I'll be starting with the Oracle tarball.)

Re:Bad summary!

[sjames]

That sort of thing has plagued Java from day one. It's never been more than write once, run anywhere that has exactly the same JVM down to the sub-sub-minor version. That seems to be improving, but can't be said to be fixed entirely. Back when Sun was pushing Java on the desktop they had a lot of complaints internally about having to have 3 versions of Java installed to cover these issues.

Re:Bad summary!

[David Gerard]

We got bitten at this at work between Sun Java 6 on Solaris SPARC versus Sun Java 6 on Linux x86. What the fuck.

Re:Bad summary!

[bzipitidoo]

I use Java as little as possible, and still run into these kinds of problems. I run Arch Linux, which right now has an openjdk6 and a jdk7-openjdk package. There was a a package based on Sun's Java, but it seems to be gone. Really annoying to have to switch between packages to get various Java apps to run, or to find that none of them work.

This sort of thing is one reason I've stayed away from Java. It's general distrust of anything that could be proprietary, no matter how open it seems. It's not even whether Sun or Oracle ever intended evil. Looks to me that it's more of a problem that the owning organization isn't capable of maintaining the product, and not because they aren't big enough-- I would guess Python, PHP, and Perl all have smaller teams-- but perhaps because they've been too controlling, or because the corporate environment has a negative impact on the competence and commitment of whomever they get to work on it. Bureaucracy. When something is broken, nobody is responsible. All languages have some backward compatibility issues, but Java is a league of its own.

Re:Bad summary!

[Billly Gates]

To mitigate the security risk simply disable java in the browsers. Infact Chrome 16 even disables it by default in windows. Thats what I do

If it is an intranet app you can confogure IE to use java for intranet and disable it for internet. I know IE makes us chringe but corps use it for a reason

Re:Bad summary!

[Anonymous Coward]

java is curses with backward compatibility issues only is you don't adhere to the sun coding standard and do something evil like directly(withtout reflection) using a com.sun package .
java real curses is the gigantic number of morons that paste code from the web, repetedly, until they get something that look like an application...

Re:Bad summary!

[Darinbob]

It should be the user's decision to remove it. It is not up to Ubuntu to remove it without the user's permission.

Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

This will be a huge problem that I didn't see coming. I wonder what the wide ranging effect will be.

But more importantly I wonder if Canonical will some how notify Ubuntu users, better than this obscure blog post, that Canonical is about to wreak havoc on their systems.

Re:Wow!

[kwark]

The impact will be about zero, replace sun-java with openjdk if you need java.

Re:Wow!

[jaymz666]

I know six months ago openjdk did not work with crashplan and I had to set the jdk to sun.

Re:Wow!

[heson]

Maybe for you, but the applets I run do require sun/oracle java and fails with the alternatives.

Re:Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, because nothing breaks if you do that.

The only reason I have Sun's JRE on my system is that I have software that won't run on OpenJDK because of improper dependency on com.sun.* packages. Is Canonical going to distribute a com.sun jar for use with OpenJDK?

Re:Wow!

[David Gerard]

Yuh. The problem is existing code by mediocre programmers.

Re:Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

Careful you forgot to put in the word closed source / proprietary before programmers. Would not want those paying you to troll to fire you over such a simply screwup. Tell RMS I said hi!

Re:Wow!

[David Gerard]

There's plenty of shitty open sores code out there too. ActiveMQ is one particular example we've been hitting our foreheads against - little weirdnesses with OpenJDK that disappear with Sun Java. Even with Sun Java, we were running a tweaked internal version for a while, something that's on the big list of "NEVER DO THIS unless you actually have to THEN YOU'RE FUCKED ANYWAY."

OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

Sensationalist headline is sensationalist.

Ubuntu will still have the OpenJDK, which is maintained in part by Oracle. "Sun Java" refers to a specific JVM installation.

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

You meant
"Ubuntu will still have the OpenJDK, which is not actually working for most stuff"
And alternatively users can download the JRE 7 from Oracle, which also does not work for a lot of stuff.
Great help that.
Java: Fails everywhere.

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

Nor are they removing the package: they're disabling the browser plugin, because it has known holes and it's not maintained.

But yeah this is slashdot, the FOX News of tech.

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course "Sun Java" refers to a specific implementation, otherwise the headline would omit "Sun" and just write "Java". Kids these days have no deductive skills.

Re:OpenJDK

[Svartalf]

It's not about them no longer supplying it, but actually ripping it out of your box. They've already distributed it, and under an appropriate license- it wasn't leased out and the license doesn't require removal once the license is retired.

It does not make any sense to do what Canonical's doing here. Not happy about that thinking.

Re:OpenJDK

[Kagetsuki]

If I had mod points you wouldn't be -1 right now. Troll/Flamebate or not your post is depressingly accurate.

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, -1 pissed user would be the correct category. Which I admit is hard to distinguish from a troll :-).

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

They have to because the current package is vulnerable to remote code execution and they aren't allowed to distribute the fix. If you want to keep vulnerable code on your box, tell the package manager to hold the package at the current version:

        sudo aptitude hold sun-java6-jre sun-java6-bin sun-java6-jdk sun-java6-plugin sun-java6-source sun-java6-demo

Or install OpenJDK instead.

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

They're not forcibly removing it in the way, say, 1984 was removed from Kindle. Security issues were found so, since Canonical is not allowed to distibute patched versions, they're puttiing out a security update that simply removes the package. You are free not to accept that update, but your system will then be less secure than if you had accepted moving to OpenJDK.

Re:OpenJDK

[LordLimecat]

Why is this flamebait? Its utterly accurate. I havent been able to deploy Java7 anywhere, mostly because i havent found more than 1 program (minecraft) which actually works with it.

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

They gave a really good explanation as to why they did it and you even gave them the authority to do so! If they didn't do this then they would be failing to provide a stable a secure environment. In all honesty I think they should remove all non-free software (drivers, firmware, and other blobs in the kernel even).

Fortunately Trisquel is a derived distribution that does exactly this:

http://www.trisquel.info/

Re:OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

Sensationalist headline is sensationalist.

In other news: boring headline is boring. More at 6

Re:OpenJDK

[DragonWriter]

It's not about them no longer supplying it, but actually ripping it out of your box. They've already distributed it, and under an appropriate license- it wasn't leased out and the license doesn't require removal once the license is retired.

It does not make any sense to do what Canonical's doing here.

Canonical is only indirectly removing it because of licensing issues. They are directly removing it because of critical security issues. Were it not for licensing issues, they could distribute the newer version of Sun (now Oracle) Java which fixes the security issues, but because they can't, the security fix is to push an update which removes the critically-vulnerable software as a security update.

Obviously, if one is actively reviewing updates before applying them, as one should be on any non-toy system, this won't be an issue. You'll either apply the update and then and download updated Java from Oracle if you are dependent on the Oracle JVM, or if you really want to keep the existing version for some arcane reason, you just won't apply the update.

This won't work

[Anonymous Coward]

All it takes is someone to pick apart the update, someone else to mirror it a few times and then all the people googleing for "java is broken in Ubuntu" find a modified update that fixes it. anyway, why does a distribution license expiry mean that people who already have copies may no longer use it?

Re:This won't work

[icebraining]

why does a distribution license expiry mean that people who already have copies may no longer use it?

Lack of security updates. Canonical thinks that if you want to keep it, you can just apt pin it, while people who might not even know they have it installed are better off not being exposed to its problems.

Re:This won't work

[David Gerard]

It doesn't - bad summary conflates "no license to distribute" with "security hole" - the security hole is why Ubuntu needs to fix this, but the only fix they can apply is to remove the package since they can't distribute the fixed version any more.

Re:This won't work

[Anonymous Coward]

You can still use it, but Canonical is prohibited from packaging the newest version containing security updates because of Oracle's withdrawal of the distribution license. All Ubuntu's update does is disable the browser java plugin, which is the most likely vector to exploit the vulnerabilities in 6u26. It won't remove the jre/jdk from your system. The users will have to do that themselves. When they do, the package manager will work out the dependencies and install the appropriate OpenJDK packages to fullfill them. Users can still run Oracle's version, but they'll have to install and check for updates themselves. There's plenty of online guides on how to do that.

And OpenJDK still not working

[Anonymous Coward]

All the while OpenJDK still doesn't work with half of the stuff out there, for example Juniper's SSL VPN.
Great! Java: Compile once, works nowhere.

Re:And OpenJDK still not working

[jaymz666]

doesn't work with crashplan, either

Re:And OpenJDK still not working

[Goaway]

Remember when they used to call C a portable programming language?

Remember when they used to call Java a portable programming language?

Re:And OpenJDK still not working

[Noughmad]

Remember when they used to call C a portable programming language?

Why did they stop? C is the most portable language.

Re:And OpenJDK still not working

[Billly Gates]

It is portable. However openjdk =! Sun jdk. Its nuetered with peoole trying to readd functionalty kind of like wine

Bad news.

[marcello_dl]

Let's hope they handle this well (aka a de updater that lets people know what and why it happens).
I am critical about ubuntu usually, and I can almost hear some bearded guy saying: "Told you so, next time learn to build upon Free Software instead". But I think this time they would have rather avoided this and they couldn't.

I dunno, the industry seems to be killing java and flash ahead of time.

We all knew this would happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, most people knew this would happen if Oracle got their hands on Sun's intellectual property. However, didn't think it would happen so quickly. My only question is, how good are the other alternatives. Pros, and Cons.

Re:We all knew this would happen

[icebraining]

Uh, OpenJDK is now the official Java release from Oracle, the closed source JDK is basically obsolete. You shouldn't use it unless you really need to.

Re:We all knew this would happen

[facetiousprogrammer]

Linux JAVA from oracle site: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jdk-7u2-download-1377129.html

SUN JAVA is not the only JAVA

[xee]

Ubuntu uses OpenJDK Java by default. Users have for years had the option to switch out the default OpenJDK Java for an alternative package in the 3rd party repository which is Sun Java. That alternative is being removed. In fact, it has never been available in the latest Oneiric 11.10 release of ubuntu. In the latest release OpenJDK is the default & the only java available from the package repos.

Most people use OpenJDK on Ubuntu and for them this news means nothing.

If you're using an older release (11.04 or earlier) and you have sun-java installed, simply remove the package & install default-jdk. problem solved.

Re:SUN JAVA is not the only JAVA

[rec9140]

"latest Oneiric 11.10 release of ubuntu."

May not be in the official repos, but you can add a PPA and install it, or get a distro which is smart enough to know that OJDK and Java 7 are duds and 99.99% of software doesn't work and install the last of the 6 branch by default, oh thats Julep Linux

And now I get to pin that package... yeah... more skills to learn..

", simply remove the package & install default-jdk. problem solved."

No then my software quits working... no thanks!

This is both commercial and open source, it does not, has not, and never will work on OJDK, and I for one and pleased with that.

oracle is a scerge and its 7 JRE is junk, and just after $$$ which we all knew but did nothing to stop it... and OJDK just go away!

Re:SUN JAVA is not the only JAVA

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, sun Java is the only Java which works with the online banking application I have to use...

Re:SUN JAVA is not the only JAVA

[jwhitener]

Except a lot of things don't seem to work as well using OpenJDK. Heck, even Minecraft recommends Sun Java.

Why do they need a distribution license?

[TrekkieGod]

Why does Canonical even need a "Operating System Distributor License" for Java? Wasn't Java re-licensed as GPL v2 back in the Sun days? How can they stop anyone from distributing something under the GPL?

Re:Why do they need a distribution license?

[Trepidity]

OpenJDK is based on the open-sourced version of Java, and Canonical continues to distribute that (and it's the default on Ubuntu). What's being removed is the official Sun (now Oracle) Java packages. They used to include those as well, because there were some compatibility issues with OpenJDK and some apps (especially commercial apps).

Re:Why do they need a distribution license?

[dominux]

because this particular version that is being retired is not the GPL version. It is the yuccy non-free edition and being proprietary software you are using it at the whim of the copyright owner (Oracle) and not by the user. It is also buggy and insecure. It is being removed from users machines because it is buggy and insecure. If you want the GPL version that is safe to use long term and is actually in Ubuntu (rather than in the *canonical* partner repo) then use openJDK which is GPL licensed and you use it at your own discretion, not that of Oracle.

Re:Why do they need a distribution license?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does Canonical even need a "Operating System Distributor License" for Java? Wasn't Java re-licensed as GPL v2 back in the Sun days? How can they stop anyone from distributing something under the GPL?

1) That's OpenJDK, not Sun/Oracle JDK.
2) Yes, Oracle can stop people because Oracle is the copyright holder, the copyright holder is not bound by the terms of the license they use on their own software. [Oracle can distribute a program as both GPL w/ source and a proprietary w/ extras and that's ok, they are the copyright holder and would have to sue themself for violating the GPL*]

* (If you think you can sue Oracle then you haven't understood how copyright works, if some guy sells proprietary software containing GPL stuff, only the other guy who wrote the GPL stuff has grounds to sue [the GPL license is between proprietary guy and author guy, not you (user guy), you are under proprietary guy's license and have no standing])

Re:Why do they need a distribution license?

[Anonymous Coward]

2) Yes, Oracle can stop people because Oracle is the copyright holder, the copyright holder is not bound by the terms of the license they use on their own software. [Oracle can distribute a program as both GPL w/ source and a proprietary w/ extras and that's ok, they are the copyright holder and would have to sue themself for violating the GPL*]

As the copyright holder, you can dual-license something with the GPL. You can't stop anyone from distributing it under the GPL, because they simply picked one of the licenses you offered. You can stop licensing your new releases under the GPL, but you can't retroactively change the license of the old releases.

What about updates?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are all Linux user going to have to know manually install *every* update to Oracle's Java then? No offense to the OpenJDK guys but some stuff just doesn't work right with it. If I remember correctly, a lot of the really big performance boost are also only in Oracle's JVM...

Re:What about updates?

[Anne Thwacks]

The vital point you have missed is that Oracle is "the OpenJDK guys". Yes, once again Oracle screws its customers. Thats what Oracle does.

Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see how Apple can survive and prosper. They've targeted customers who are either spending somebody else's money (mainly the children of the wealthy living off of "daddy's money" or trust funds), those who are financially foolish (people who buy useless gadgets on credit), and those seeking a modern religion (the so-called Apple fanatics). This has let them put out sub-par products with pretty horrible limitations, but they can still sell them outrageous prices, and coupled with third-world manufacturing it allows them to make a very sizable profit.

Canonical has none of this. While it did put out some useful extensions to the Debian Linux distribution, they just don't seem to have the ongoing financial stranglehold that Apple has acquired. They aren't targeting the children of the wealthy, or those who waste money. Some degree of religious fanaticism has arisen around Ubuntu, but it surely doesn't seem capable of providing the financial support that Apple's religious following does.

Moves like continuing to use GNOME when KDE was clearly the better desktop environment, then later ruining the desktop experience by moving to Unity, and now stuff like this are exactly what will drive users away. Many of the smartest Ubuntu users have moved to Linux Mint. The remaining Ubuntu users seem to be those who aren't smart enough to learn about the alternatives. They don't seem like the kind of people who will pay good money for Ubuntu, either.

Apple's financial strategy seems to be pretty solid, but I just can't see Canonical's at all. How can they survive as a company without financial backing?

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

Moves like continuing to use GNOME when KDE was clearly the better desktop environment

Um, Kubuntu.

Re:Not for long?

[GordonBX]

Whoah. Tone down on the bitterness man. I wish I had some of your insight into the world - on second thoughts I'm glad I don't.

They've targeted customers who are either spending somebody else's money (mainly the children of the wealthy living off of "daddy's money" or trust funds), those who are financially foolish (people who buy useless gadgets on credit), and those seeking a modern religion (the so-called Apple fanatics)

Yeah - those are the *only* people who buy Apple gadgets. Those millions and millions of foolish people living off daddy's money. Damn them! Damn them to Hell!

This has let them put out sub-par products with pretty horrible limitations,

Yeah, those MacBook Airs are just *rubbish* man. I *totally* can't see why Intel is giving other notebook vendors $100m just to try and come up with a reasonable competitor

but they can still sell them outrageous prices, and coupled with third-world manufacturing it allows them to make a very sizable profit.

obviously Samsung (and by extension Google), Amazon, Motorola, HTC and the rest are *good* companies because the fact that they have to sell their stuff at half the price just to try and get people to buy one and therefore don't make a profit at all means that *their* exploration of third world labour is somehow alright?

TL;DR version: OMFG get off your high horse mr AC anti-apple troll.

Re:Not for long?

[Gonoff]

He was talking about Ubuntu - the main offering. As a smart operation, of course Canonical has alternative offerings. Their main distro came with Gnome,

Whether that was good or bad, is a matter of opinion. Personally, I preferred KDE but chopped and changed between the two.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Yeah, those MacBook Airs are just *rubbish* man. I *totally* can't see why Intel is giving other notebook vendors $100m just to try and come up with a reasonable competitor"

Because all popular products are good?

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like unpopular products are good? The Air is an excellent machine with no comparable competitor.

Re:Not for long?

[Space cowboy]

That's a question reasonably asked for products that are popular by fiat, or by default.

When one has to spend more money, thereby implicitly rejecting cheaper competitors; when suppliers to said competitors attempt to push them in the same direction; when the market-share owned by these products is almost unbelievably high percentage (Apple owns ~90% of the $1k portable market, IIRC), it would not seem such a reasonable question...

Simon

Re:Not for long?

[Nemyst]

Samsung Series 9. Asus Zenbook. If you want to get extreme, Sony VAIO Z.

Unless obviously you meant it in the way that it runs OSX, in which case I'll just shrug.

Re:Not for long?

[Galestar]

Yeah, those MacBook Airs are just rubbish man.

Glad you can at least admit to that... but in Apple's defense the hardware isn't rubbish, just that piece of shit OS they have on it is.

Re:Not for long?

[DamonHD]

The spittle's really flying.

Some of us might like and use *nix in various flavours, including Solaris, Linux and OS X, without subscribing to whatever cult you're projecting your hatred onto today.

Rgds

Damon

Re:Not for long?

[jo_ham]

No, not all popular products are good, but it's pretty easy to determine the relative quality of a MacBook Air - it's a physical product that many, many people have reviewed and used across the whole gamut of computer users and it gets consistently high marks.

You can try and handwave away that positive experience of many, many people by claiming it's all down to popularity, but it's somewhat wide of the mark.

Personally, I do not care for them, but I can appreciate that it is a very good compact laptop/subnotebook.

Re:Not for long?

[cyber-vandal]

I'm neither of those 3. I paid my own cash for my iMac because it was the best machine for the money I was willing to spend and I have no interest whatsoever in fanboyism. I like my Mac but I've got no interest in criticising other people's choice of hardware.

Re:Not for long?

[jedidiah]

Sony sold comparable machines 10 years ago.

Stop swimming in the kool-aid.

Re:Not for long?

[cyber-vandal]

Why is it shit?

Re:Not for long?

[517714]

Zenbook, yes - on specs and price. Series 9 not even close, even though it lists for more. The Sony is a good match performance-wise that would have been great with the addition of a decent graphics processor, which it should have included given its premium price - it isn't that extreme except in price. Apple has a distinct edge because it is setting the price points and the competition is in the unenviable position of matching specs or bettering them - at this point only one competitor is seriously challenging Apple.

Re:Not for long?

[hairyfeet]

I'll get hate for wading in with such obvious fanbois but WTF, truth is truth> You wanna know why Linux is dead last and going exactly nowhere? Its because you people really really REALLY suck at GUIs, you really do. While you may think some damned 70s terminal is the essence of nirvana the rest of the world has moved on dude, and nobody wants to play with your damned blinking cursor crap.

I mean holy fuck you are missing features that Windows had a fricking decade ago and while I don't have an OSX machine to confirm I wouldn't be surprised if Apple had them even longer. Where the fuck is the roll back drivers button? How about the find drivers button? You expect the user to magically know the make/model/rev of any and all pieces of hardware and go do the "find a fix" forum dance which ALWAYS ends with "open up bash and type" aka "We suck balls at GUIs so please take our shitty terminal again" with NO thought of ease of use or intuitiveness.

So you can make your little comments about how Windows and OSX is for "noobs" or how they "suck" but you know what? Apple and MSFT could raise their prices 300% and YOU WOULD NOT GAIN A SINGLE POINT because your designs are backwards, they are NOT intuitive, they are as unfriendly as can possibly be, and the GUIs frankly are extremely basic and often barely functional as I found out when network manager wouldn't take changes in the GUI, tossing them on each reboot. Guess what the solution was? We suck balls at GUIs so please take our terminal. Every. single. time you see "Open up bash and type" you have just written "We suck and are full of fail" because nobody else wants that lame shit but you.

The sad part is you have most of the pieces, a kernel that does everything a modern kernel should, several (partially) functional DEs that with some polish could be damned nice, and drivers for most hardware, but frankly you couldn't put all these pieces together into a solid intuitive OS if someone put a gun to the head of RMS and told you "do it or the hippie gets it". You know what Linux at this stage reminds me of? Windows 98. What was Win98? It was a CLI OS with a GUI shell bolted on top that kinda sorta worked but for anything more than basic tasks failed, was buggy as fuck, and to get anything complicated done you had to go CLI which you could even bypass the GUI shell completely and just go CLI. What is Linux now? It is a CLI OS with a GUI shell bolted on top that kinda sorta works but for anything more than basic tasks fails, is buggy as fuck, and to get anything complicated done you need to go CLI which you can even bypass the GUI shell completely and just go CLI.

Apple and MSFT are bringing their A games, which is why MSFT had one of its biggest quarters EVAR just recently and Apple is now one of the biggest corps ON THE PLANET and what do you bring? DE wars and CLI and Mickey Mouse amateur hour bugs. Sorry but there is a reason why you can't give your OS away, and it ain't no conspiracy, its the same reason every OEM from Asus who started Linux on netbooks to retailers like Walmart run away from your OS. Its not stable, its buggy, its too damned fiddly, it lacks polish, its too dependent on 70s terminals. In other words you are bringing your D game and everyone knows it. Now stick THAT in your terminal and compile it!

Re:Not for long?

[gstrickler]

No one sold a comparable machine 10 years ago, not at any price. It wasn't possible to make a comparable machine 10 years ago.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

When you say stuff like "I paid my own cash for my iMac because it was the best machine for the money", it's clear that you call under the "financially foolish" category.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Apple and MSFT could raise their prices 300% and YOU WOULD NOT GAIN A SINGLE POINT"

Actually, the initial netbook market shows that this isn't true. Microsoft had to drop their prices substantially because they were losing market share to Linux due to the Windows license being a huge portion of the price tag.

Re:Not for long?

[Galestar]

wtf? I post an anti-mac comment and you post this huge rant about Linux, assuming I am from that camp. I have said the same things about Linux over and over and over again. y you mad tho?
(Posted from my Windows 7 64bit machine)

Re:Not for long?

[goldgin]

wow and this post got 5 for insightfulness? brb (moves on to type "slashdot alternatives" on google)

Re:Not for long?

[s4m7]

Before I start, let me clarify that I am not a *fanboi* but the primary maintainer of a least a dozen production machines each of Windows 7, OS X, and Ubuntu linux. Therefore I feel I'm qualified to shed some light on your misconceptions. Take this response not as *hate* but as an assumption that you are not willfully ignorant about what you're talking about, and you just need someone knowledgeable to clear up your obvious confusion. That said...

truth is truth

conceded

You wanna know why Linux is dead last and going exactly nowhere?

Dead last on desktops. Number one in the server space. Number one in handhelds. PC ownership has stagnated. The mobile space is where all the growth is happening, and linux-based OS's are eating everyone but Apple's lunch in this field. Even Apple is still relegated to playing a strong second fiddle.

There are no anti-competitve bundling deals with PC distributors in the linux world. There's also little in the way of manufacturer and application support. Those are the real reasons. Less technical and more political than you seem to think.

you people really really REALLY suck at GUIs

This is a gross generalization. Gnome is really no more or less user friendly than any of the commercial alternatives. All of the several different viable options for linux destkop environments have their strengths and faults. It's not any different for Windows or OS X.

While you may think some damned 70s terminal is the essence of nirvana

For at least the last 5 years, use of the terminal on an Ubuntu desktop system is about as central as it is on Windows or OS X. Pros do it for convenience, but it isn't necessary unless you're trying to do something unorthodox. This is an old, dead, troll of an argument against Linux. Try a modern Linux desktop, it's really not as bad as you seem to think it is.

you are missing features that Windows had a fricking decade ago

By the same token, windows is still missing many features Linux had 20 years ago.

Where the fuck is the roll back drivers button? How about the find drivers button? You expect the user to magically know the make/model/rev of any and all pieces of hardware

Driver management in Linux is handled through the package manager, because drivers are software. I haven't needed to roll back a driver, ever. I did so exactly once to enable visual effects and it was complete cake. No CLIs were employed. The last time I needed to use lspci to determine the model of a piece of hardware because it wasn't autodetected was 2006. The last few releases of Ubuntu even notify me when there's a better proprietary (manufacturer) driver than the bundled open one, and automatically install THAT.

you couldn't put all these pieces together into a solid intuitive OS if someone put a gun to the head of RMS

so wait, *you're* the one worried about getting "hate" from "fanbois"? Ummm...

What is Linux now? It is a CLI OS with a GUI shell bolted on top

An OS is not "CLI or GUI". OS's work to abstract hardware from software. That is their purpose. OSX is a mach microkernel OS with a GUI on top. Windows 7 is a NT-family kernel with a GUI on top.

You're obviously really upset about linux. I don't really understand why, it sounds like you're really happy with Win7 and that's fine. You can rage about terminals and drivers, and it's not going to change any Linux users' minds about their choice in OS. And since win7 can't run ZFS and won't take the GUI code out of protected kernel space, your angry rant isn't going to change my mind either.

Point being that choice is good, each OS has its strengths and weaknesses. I salute your right to choose and even though windows is far and away the hardest of the three to administer, and you clearly have no need of the superior features Linux does offer, I'm glad you're happy with it.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

just that piece of shit OS they have on it is

I tend to agree. Mac OS X is the ugliest, slowest, most unusable, most unstable, most insecure operating system the world has ever known. Except for all the others.

Re:Not for long?

[MindCheese]

Come back to this thread when you need to use a computer for something other than watching Justin Bieber videos and poking at Flash games on Facebook. Linux is not a "GUI shell bolted on top of a CLI OS", it's a kernel. You probably think you know what the difference is, but your foaming rant makes it strikingly clear you don't.

There are plenty of dumb appliances out there already that will hide the scary complexities of a computer from you.

Re:Not for long?

[dead_cthulhu]

I'll get hate for wading in with such obvious fanbois but WTF, truth is truth> You wanna know why Linux is dead last and going exactly nowhere? Its because you people really really REALLY suck at GUIs, you really do. While you may think some damned 70s terminal is the essence of nirvana the rest of the world has moved on dude, and nobody wants to play with your damned blinking cursor crap.

Bullshit. Only time I even touch the CLI is when I find it more efficient. NVidia drivers? One-click install. Restricted codecs? Same.

I mean holy fuck you are missing features that Windows had a fricking decade ago and while I don't have an OSX machine to confirm I wouldn't be surprised if Apple had them even longer. Where the fuck is the roll back drivers button?

Never had to rollback drivers (or anything for that matter 'cept Opera), but I'd assume that Snapper on my OpenSuSE box provides for rollbacks of any other update drivers included. I wouldn't be surprised if other distros had similar functionality.

You expect the user to magically know the make/model/rev of any and all pieces of hardware and go do the "find a fix" forum dance which ALWAYS ends with "open up bash and type"

Mostly bullshit. Okay, my distro doesn't have a magic drivers button like *buntu, but I just hit Google and about 15 seconds later, drivers are installing after one click and a confirm prompt. No CLI needed.

What is Linux now? It is a CLI OS with a GUI shell bolted on top that kinda sorta works but for anything more than basic tasks fails, is buggy as fuck, and to get anything complicated done you need to go CLI which you can even bypass the GUI shell completely and just go CLI.

Any modern distro has a well-integrated GUI that is just as stable as Windows or OS X. Hell, due to Apple wanting to make the OS idiot-proof, doing anything complicated in OS X requires knowledge of Bash. Want Time Machine to only make backups once or twice a day so it's not chewing up your HDD? Welcome to bash and adding a cronjob. Want ipfw to actually have a default deny cleanup rule instead of allow? Bash again, or a third-party utility.

Apple and MSFT are bringing their A games,

That they are. This is a good thing. It means that users have choices, and good choices at that.

Re:Not for long?

[jonbryce]

Linux isn't dead. Pretty much every TV I see for sale except for the very basic ones runs linux. Digital video recorders - most of them run linux. Wifi routers, again, pretty much every one except the Airport runs linux. Telephones - The Blackberry and iPhone don't run linux, nor do the few remaining dumb-phones, but a fairly significant number of them do.

Linux is also alive and well in the server space. I administer both linux and windows servers. When I want to do something on the linux boxes, a single command line entry over ssh will generally do the trick. On windows, I have to log in using RPD and click around a load of places to do the same thing. Obviously the average Joe User isn't going to be comfortable with ssh, but the average Joe User doesn't administer servers.

Linux isn't very popular on the desktop, I see it in a few corporate locations where it is set up as a single purpose device, and it works as well as windows would doing the same thing, except that linux allows them to use much cheaper hardware, but linux is no more dead because it isn't that popular on the desktop than windows is dead because it isn't very popular in the mobile space.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

unless he wanted to do some iPhone dev, where buying a non apple machine makes life a bit more difficult.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

What a worthless piece of shit you are.

And no, I am not a fanboi. I am far too much of a nerd to limit myself to one thing. I am blessed with enough time to explore all kinds of technology without somehow becoming the emotional basketcase your slashdot persona presents.

My unsolicited advice: Get a life, and go fuck yourself.

Re:Not for long?

[tonywestonuk]

This is the most f*in insightful comment I have seen on slashdot. +10

Re:Not for long?

[hairyfeet]

Thank you, but I'm just a humble retailer that got tired of being lied to. I mean if their OS was actually good then why has ASUS has given up on Linux? If it is so stable then why does Dell have to run their own repos even though we are talking a teeny tiny subset of hardware? If it is so secure then

how, do you explain these?

So you see somewhere on the way to be a good OS Linux quit being an OS and became a religion. Admittance of the myriad of problems is NOT allowed, anymore that you could question the Koran or Bible in the home of a fundie. Frankly Canonical could change the default picture to Goatse and we'd see apologists come out of the woodwork to explain that is actually a biting social commentary on our times.

Here are some facts: Fact 1- All the major OEMs frankly ignore Linux not because of some secret M$ Ninja conspiracy, but because its so damned unstable thanks to Torvalds treating the kernel as his own playground. this attitude which is expressed by the man himself right here mean a company either has to do like dell and pay a team to basically run their OWN distro, no small task, or deal with a broken mess when Torvalds goes 'Lol Goatse!" and breaks shit. this is why even Canonical admitted there is a FOUR TIMES higher return rate for Ubuntu netbooks which makes linux a money LOSER for any company foolish enough to try. Walmart, Asus, these companies don't just abandon a product willy nilly you know, they did it because of the reasons i listed.

The sad part? All the basic parts are there, a modern kernel, DEs that with some serious polish could be great, plenty of drivers, but the zealots and itch scratching devs make sure Linux goes exactly nowhere. the ONLY reason it has gotten anywhere on servers is MSFT's frankly ass raping prices on CALs. If MSFT dropped the price of WinServer to $100 and the price of CALs to a buck a pop Linux would dry up and blow away, anybody that was honest would admit this. As a Linux admin i know put it "if you give a Windows and Linux admin the same job that the Linux guy has done repeatedly then the Linux admin WILL win, but if its a completely new task? the windows admin will be home making a sandwich before the Linux admin is done Googling".

But instead of admitting that CLIs are for servers and GUIs for desktops you'll get 300 page treaties on how "CLI is leet!" and how much better the world would be if "They would only embrace the POWER of CLI" like its the god damned force. So instead all you get is flag waving and fangirls. notice how many above me rushed to say "And I'm not a fanboi"? Every time you read that the translation should be "I'm such a fangirl I squee like a tweener at a Beiber concert when i see a Bash prompt!"

Ultimately though their denial can't change reality and the simple fact is their precious awesome OS lower than JavaME , a shitty third rate cellphone OS. Why? If it is sooo good why is it so low? Because it ISN'T good, its a buggy, fiddly, unfriendly, unintuitive, CLI heavy fiddly bitch that is about as far from the level of polish from OSX and Win 7 as it is from here to Europa. If they weren't so busy drooling over bash prompts maybe they'd ask the most important question, which is "What are our competitors doing right that we are doing wrong?' but that would mean admitting 70s terminals are as out as Disco, and they'd rather choke on RMS's sandals that admit that little truth.

Re:Not for long?

[arisvega]

Whoa. Hold on a minute there, King of the Trolls, don't you think you are comparing apples with oranges?

And do you seriously believe that ditching Linux from Asus was not a result of lobbying? How about loading them with resource-hogging Windows 7? On a friggin' 1 Gb RAM NETBOOK?

Or did you miss the part where not everybody has moneygrants from their daddy to buy all these shiny gadgets?

Re:Not for long?

[hairyfeet]

Notice how the ONLY answer you can come up with is "nigger faggot cocksucker" aka "troll shill astroturfer"? that is what happens when an OS becomes a religion. Nowadays the ONLY correct thing you can say to appease the FOSSies is "Gee isn't Linux doubleplusgood? Why it sure is biff, and RMS' farts cure cancer!"

And I personally have a Win 7 netbook, the EEE E-350 and frankly its as snappy as can be. It runs so good i use it as a portable music creation studio with Audacity, Acid, and Hydrogen, and that is with the full win 7 HP. for Atom netbooks Win 7 Starter is quite snappy as well although frankly there is only so much you can do when you are talking about a chip as weak as Atom. unless of course all you want is a bash prompt in which case here is a beagleboard, knock yourself out. Personally for Atom based i simply copy the tricks employed by the "Tiny 7" guy who frankly needs to be hired STAT by MSFT as he has Win 7 running damned nice on a 1GHz with less than 512Mb of RAM, faster than WinXP on the same hardware in fact due to Win 7 having better memory management.

But in the end numbers don't lie and when BOTH the OEMS AND the retailers, from little shops like mine to the megacorps like walmart STILL won't take your shit even when its free? its time to take a good long hard look in the mirror and ask yourself the most important question, which is "What are my competitors doing right that I'm doing wrong?" but then you'd have to admit your precious bash is a throwback to the age of disco that nobody but you gives a shit about and the community would rather lick RMS' underwear than admit the truth.

BTW did you know that Win 7 doesn't even have start>run or CMD anymore? Its now buried waaaaay in the back of accessories as a depreciated tech, it simply isn't needed anymore. While I don't have an OSX machine to check I wouldn't doubt if the same is true for the latest version of Apple's OS as well. Doesn't that give you a clue? doesn't that ring ANY bells? Nope you'll just say "CLI is leet!" and promptly sit down in the middle of the racetrack to write a bash script while Windows and OSX stroll across the finish line. I mean when an OS that has a $1000 barrier to entry gains share during the Vista debacle and you don't gain jack shit, doesn't that FINALLY light that little bulb over your head? or do you think its a vast conspiracy by Gates and the Illuminati to bury your precious GNU?

I used to laugh at crazy old RMS, now I think he's just a sad reflection of the community as a whole. Did you know he STILL addresses audiences as "hackers" like its 1978 and he is at a homebrew club? Sadly that is linux in a nutshell, a bunch of sad little programmers that long for the days when computers were special and they in turn were special for being able to use them, while the rest of the world has moved on decades ago. Its not 1978 anymore, just FYI.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL. Nice. I'm posting anonymously because I phear the fanbois targeting my other posts for negative moddage. Rock on, dude. I agree 100%. AND I work for a UNIX OS vendor ;).

Re:Not for long?

[cyber-vandal]

I read your comment earlier and decided to see if I could get the same spec machine for less from Dell as an example. I managed it. It was about 5 GBP cheaper for a similar spec machine with a 27in 2560x1440 screen like the iMac has. I'm quite happy to have paid 5 quid more for a higher quality device.

Re:Not for long?

[Anonymous Coward]

Trisquel is one of the best looking Gnome 2 based distros and it is FSF approved due to being a completely free-software distro including a libre kernel and removing non-free hardware from Ubuntu.

http://www.trisquel.info

Re:Not for long?

[arisvega]

Notice how the ONLY answer you can come up with is "nigger faggot cocksucker"

No, and you carefully omitted my points which, seen from some of your previous posts, is something you keep indulging in. You keep on rambling and rambling, believing that you have understood what the comment is, where in fact -brace yourself- you haven't. You also call it 'answer' where in actuality I asked you questions, but you are apparently too busy smelling your own farts to notice and in your defensive little self you think everybody is out to get you, so you show your teeth from line one.

A friendly advice: let go a bit, and start trusting people, while you still have time.

Another one: you may be a smart guy, maybe more than average where you live in, but that doesn't mean there are no others smarter than you, and

Last one: splash some water to your face, go read my post again but this time without allowing the little sinister voices in your head to translate it for you. Try to see what it is that I am trying to say, not what you think I am saying because -and that might come as a surprise to you- you may be wrong.

That said, you are (and without the tiniest amount of discretion) omitting that

a) Linux is free,

b) One can hire someone to maintain it, have courses, or become self-taught by both experience and example,

c) "Mr Tiny 7" or whatever gets you back to square one, since you would have to hack your own machine (alas, especially for windows users) so your point on "optimizing/tweaking" W7 to get them to "run" in small resources is moot by your own argumentation,

d) Linux rules the server world, and

e) there are several ways to make your point into a slashdot post without acting like a dick which you, as I see from some of your previous posts, is something you are inclined to.

So feel free to ramble on after this post, I am only going to answer if you post something worthy of answering.

FYI I use a Mac, so I guess you FAILed this one.

Re:Not for long?

[unixisc]

Where the fuck is the roll back drivers button? How about the find drivers button? You expect the user to magically know the make/model/rev of any and all pieces of hardware

Driver management in Linux is handled through the package manager, because drivers are software. I haven't needed to roll back a driver, ever. I did so exactly once to enable visual effects and it was complete cake. No CLIs were employed. The last time I needed to use lspci to determine the model of a piece of hardware because it wasn't autodetected was 2006. The last few releases of Ubuntu even notify me when there's a better proprietary (manufacturer) driver than the bundled open one, and automatically install THAT.

Actually, no. I once had my RH Linux crash, and it needed a new install. So I took this opportunity to use a different distro, which was still RH based, but used a more recent kernel version. Which was fine, until it came to the sound drivers. The ALSA version I used w/ RH did not work w/ this one, and so I had to go back to the ALSA website, download a few of their recent drivers, and by trial & error, see which one worked. It turned out that I had to use an older version of ALSA if I wanted it to work w/ this newer kernel. And it was not something I could do w/ rpm or even yumm - I had to do a .configure and make install to get it to work, which it finally did.

Your package manager only works w/ software that rides over your OS, but is not applicable when you have to install things in the kernel, such as device drivers. In other words, it's fine if you're trying to install packages like Avidemux, Cinerella or Opera (although Opera really puked on my while updating versions, and ended up as unworkable). But if you are trying to install device drivers, you'd be lucky if something like rpm works, and you have to really know which version of a kernel will work w/ which version of a driver, or try various combinations while doing a .configure && make install. should be possible to configure everything via GUI which is still not a case for too many situations and operations.

What is Linux now? It is a CLI OS with a GUI shell bolted on top

An OS is not "CLI or GUI". OS's work to abstract hardware from software. That is their purpose. OSX is a mach microkernel OS with a GUI on top. Windows 7 is a NT-family kernel with a GUI on top.

You're obviously really upset about linux. I don't really understand why, it sounds like you're really happy with Win7 and that's fine. You can rage about terminals and drivers, and it's not going to change any Linux users' minds about their choice in OS. And since win7 can't run ZFS and won't take the GUI code out of protected kernel space, your angry rant isn't going to change my mind either.

Point being that choice is good, each OS has its strengths and weaknesses. I salute your right to choose and even though windows is far and away the hardest of the three to administer, and you clearly have no need of the superior features Linux does offer, I'm glad you're happy with it.

An OS itself is not a CLI or GUI, but its interface w/ the user is important. Editing files in /etc is one way of doing it. Being able to go into an utility such as a Control Panel, and go into System and Devices and manage things there is another way of doing it. If an user has to edit files in /etc, then the OS is fine for geeks who know that stuff, but not for the average user. Yeah, everybody needs to know what they are doing and how, but in Windows, it's not difficult to figure out that one has to go the the Control Panel -> System -> Hardware -> Device Manager, and select the item needed and update the driver from wherever the source file may be. But that's not something that someone in an unixesque environment can be reasonably expected to figure

Re:Not for long?

[unixisc]

Moves like continuing to use GNOME when KDE was clearly the better desktop environment

Um, Kubuntu.

A pioneer among distros, who decided to make Rekonq, which is not even version 1.x as their default browser, replacing Konqueror. I know that KDE has decided to embrace Webkit over KHTML, just like XML has been globally preferred to SGML, and that's fine. But why make a browser that's clearly not ready for prime time your default - particularly given all the complaints about KDE 4.0-4.5?

And...

[sensationull]

Nothing of value was lost. Seriously Java was always an abortion from a security point of view then Oracle got a hold of it and two updates a week later its still a security nightmare. The best thing that could happen is it's end, Java is more like Flash than Flash is now from a security point of view.

Kill java and remove half the attack surface from your systems.

What about Ubuntu server?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know people use Ubuntu on server systems as well. I can just imagine production systems falling over because, suddenly, there's no JRE/JDK installed anymore after routine maintenance security upgrades. Sounds like fun.

Re:What about Ubuntu server?

[David Gerard]

That would be us! I'll be handrolling a deb for now, and then we'll do extensive testing to move to OpenJDK.

Ah fuck, that means OpenJDK on devs' Windows boxes. And there's no OpenJDK 6 for Windows, only 7. And I thought Java 5 to Java 6 was politically tedious. Arsebiscuits.

Re:What about Ubuntu server?

[rec9140]

"That would be us! I'll be handrolling a deb for now.."

Do you have a good HOWTO on this? Can the old java-package suite still be used for Maverick & Oneiric to create a DEB?

The DEB HOWTO's start from source packages, not the self extracting stuff from Sun(Oracle).

No DEB Packaging is not my main job.. but I am willing to learn with some tips & hints, please.

I am just not interested in 7 and especially OJDK or IcedTea, as its already known that the vendor(s) and author(s) of the software won't be fixing it for their software. The one piece is an open source, one man project and 90% of the time he is MIA till out of no where a release shows up. Software doesn't initialize at all. So if Sun (Oracle) fubar's things to the point it no longer works on their version, then I will just keep 6.30.

And as for the "security" issue, I think thats a good cover story and red herring.

Writing was on the wall

[strredwolf]

Gentoo saw the license expiring, and did a proactive thing: flipped the "fetch restriction" flag back on, forcing users to pull it manually and slap it into the right place to install/upgrade.

Re:Writing was on the wall

[Rich0]

Gentoo is a bit unique in this regard. Gentoo tends to distribute source tarballs unmodified, and does any patching on the user's machine. That allows it to operate under more restrictive licenses. Then, if there is no license at all then we can use mirror or fetch restricting. The former prevents the file from being mirrored so that the user gets it straight from upstream. If upstream puts it behind some kind of click-to-agree page then it uses fetch restricting, which means the user is told where to go and what to download and where to put it. Gentoo still checks the hash to make sure the user gets the right thing.

Don't Mess With My Computer

[Anonymous Coward]

I have my computers setup the way I want it. That is why I disable automatic updates and selectively update. None of my windows machines are connected to the internet, and I don't have any iOS or android devices.

Re:Don't Mess With My Computer

[amiga3D]

If they're really out to get you it's not paranoia.

This underscores the importance of...

[Anonymous Coward]

Reading the license agreements.

Get my Hitchhiker's Guide Tribute Novella From Pirate Bay
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/6848623/Perfect_Me_By_Jason_Z._Christie

Oracle needs to be less stupid and less greedy...

[Cheerio Boy]

First - I want to see in the license where it requires them to pull it off systems.

Second - What the hell are they going to replace it with? Are they saying you have to download and install Java manually? OpenJDK supposedly doesn't work with all things.

Third - What does this mean for Ubuntu derivatives like Mint? Are they going to have to pull the jdk as well?

Forth - Can we _please_ take up a collection to have the Oracle execs framed for terrorism and shipped off to Gitmo?

Honestly this is just stupid.

Running Ubuntu 11.04

[phrostie]

I just checked and i'm showing OpenJDK

Re:Running Ubuntu 11.04

[CynicTheHedgehog]

That has been the default for some time now. The only reason to install sun-java-6 is if that is the target runtime for, say, a production Java application you happen to be writing, especially if you rely on esoteric command line arguments (-XX:MaxPermSize for example). So while it's not the end of the world, it certainly will cost a day or two of productivity for many Java developers and admins running Ubuntu as they will need to install the official Oracle packages, update alternatives, change symbolic links, etc. on any workstations and servers that are currently running sun-java-6. For developers targeting Java 7 this might not be that much of an issue, since the Oracle Java 7 packages are based on OpenJDK (although the commercial Oracle Java packages do have JIT and GC optimizations that may could result in unexpected behavior between dev and production environments).

It would be nice if Oracle would extend the distributors license indefinitely for Java 6. Not sure why they're bothering with it now, other than branding.

just replace your cars water pump

[decora]

with a different water pump. problem solved!!!

other than your car being out of commission for several days, and untold problems being encountered due to the incompatabilities between the old water pump and the new water pump. but whatever.

in the fantasy land of free software, you can replace word with openoffice, exchange with ????, and it wont cost anyone anything!

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Anonymous Coward]

BadAnalogyGuy, is that you?

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Waffle Iron]

Continuing this stupid analogy: Your current water pump has security issues. Thieves can use it to steal your car! It has to be replaced, even if you're so incompetent that it takes you "several days" to get the job done.

Ubuntu no longer has access to OEM pumps, due to decisions made by the manufacturer. If Ubuntu's 3rd-party pump won't work for you, you can still go directly to the OEM, download the exact replacement pump and install it, for free.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[xee]

Exactly! You already replaced your car's stock water pump with some aftermarket thing, now that's not working out so well for you. So do the right thing and replace that aftermarket water pump with an OEM part like the car came with.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[xee]

You're confused. OpenJDK is the OEM pump in Ubuntu. Sun java is the aftermarket optional part which isn't an available option on ubuntu cars anymore. (Though you can still do it yourself.)

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Kjella]

Today, maybe. I remember when OpenJDK was first introduced, it was the shoddy knockoff of real Java with band-aids everywhere Sun's code had to be ripped out, that most software - at least that I used - recommended that you replace it immediately for the real thing. It wasn't the default by any kind of technical merit, only the "Open" part. It lasted a good while before the tide turned and OpenJDK took over from Sun Java as the main implementation.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[nurb432]

Sure, pull it off the shelves, but who gives them the right to come out to my house and pull off my existing water pump, leaving me stranded?

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Pharmboy]

I don't get why that point isn't being made more strongly. It isn't Sun disabling, it is Ubuntu. Granted, they say it is a security issue, so disabling, but I think it could be handled better, or at least with more notice.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[dotancohen]

Exactly! You already replaced your car's stock water pump with some aftermarket thing, now that's not working out so well for you. So do the right thing and replace that aftermarket water pump with an OEM part like the car came with.

That OEM water pump wouldn't pump the water that I need, that is why I installed the aftermarket pump which happens to support _all_ water. Now, so long as I only use some water that was tested with the OEM pump I'm fine, but if I need water that was only tested on the aftermarket pump (which most water is, because the aftermarket pump works on all cars, not just geeky cars) then now I'm screwed.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[nurb432]

Oh, i know its ubuntu that is doing it.. And the story says its yanking previously installed copies, which is not right.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Waffle Iron]

Sure, pull it off the shelves, but who gives them the right to come out to my house and pull off my existing water pump, leaving me stranded?

Don't be obtuse. You are the only one who decides whether automatic updates occur, and/or whether to pin a package to a particular version.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[xee]

Screwed? Oh please. If you're using some weird software that depends on some nonstandard behavior in the Sunoracle JVM then you deserve to have to support that with a custom JVM installation on your system. There are worse things in the life of a sysadmin. Cry me a river.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[hawkinspeter]

You gave them the right when you opted for automatic security updates. If you don't like it, you can always get another copy of the old broken water pump for free and install it, but it's likely to flood your house.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[LordLimecat]

Oh good grief, most users, even those capable of pinning a version, arent going to know that its being pulled. Why would they suspect that their next update will be REMOVING software?

THIS type of thing is why people have to be so cautious about updates: Some genius thought it would be a good idea to throw incompatibility drama into what should be a simple upgrade process. Are they even going to warn users?

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[LordLimecat]

Except in this case the "OEM part" doesnt actually work with any of the things that use Java-- at least not that ive seen. Its more like the OEM part is a rock, and theyre telling you to figure out how to make it pump water on your own. Wonderful.

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Anonymous Coward]

THEN WHO WAS PHONE?

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Waffle Iron]

For oblivious users, it's better to discover that some Java app is temporarily broken than to discover that their system has been 0wned via security holes that are being actively exploited.

Face it, there's no possible way to resolve this situation without the end user getting involved unless Oracle changes their licensing policies. What do you propose to do?

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Anne Thwacks]

As soon as you have anything to do with Oracle, you are screwed. Sorry pal, thats how it is!

Re:just replace your cars water pump

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is when you put your car in for a service, they don't rip out your aftermarket pump because its not "pure"

Great one more package I need to manage by hand.

[Anonymous Coward]

Gaah it's like being on Windows again, having to check every single package to make sure it's up to date or deal with their own specific stupid updaters. There's a reason we have apt, why does it have to break? This isn't earning Oracle any love in my book right now.

Re:Oracle needs to be less stupid and less greedy.

[WorBlux]

First, it doesn't but it prevents the distribution of security fixes, leaving systems where it is still installed vulnerable to publicly available exploits. Second nothing, you'll have to manage updates by yourself if you want the Sun JVK. Third, not certain, but likely. Fourth, no.

Minecraft needs Sun JVM

[Anonymous Coward]

On Noes!
How will I get my Minecraft fix now!

Re:Minecraft needs Sun JVM

[Dr_Barnowl]

Really? I've had no trouble running it on OpenJDK, despite what the download pages claim.

Third Party Repo Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck it, there goes our 4 month Ubuntu workstation trial down the drain. We have Java crap which only works with Sun Java.

Re:Third Party Repo Time

[Kagetsuki]

Then install it manually or search for a PPA. Or better yet if you don't find a PPA make one. They just took it out of the main repo, they didn't ban you from installing it.

Re:Third Party Repo Time

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you even read the subject line of the parent?

Not gonna happen!

[Anonymous Coward]

I want to see them try that with my live disk!

Re:Not gonna happen!

[Ash-Fox]

It's not included with the live disc.

Not a fan of IcedTea

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I have encountered numerous problems in recent years with Java code that simply doesn't work on IcedTea. It's not doing anything clever or undocumented. It runs fine on Windows, on MacOS, and on the same Linux boxes but with a different Java run-time. On some of these projects, we had so many problems that we explicitly no longer support IcedTea and won't even consider support requests from customers who insist on using it.

I don't know about any other JREs based on OpenJDK, but IcedTea is so bug-ridden as to be unusable, and has been for a long time.

Absolutely incorrect

[zsitvaij]

No, Sun JDK is not being removed from users' computers, only the browser plugin is disabled, which is riddled with security flaws that are only corrected in newer versions that cannot be distributed by Canonical.

And no, removing the package from the repositories does not remove it from the system when already installed.

Re:Absolutely incorrect

[makomk]

Not quite. The browser plugin is being disabled immediately and at some point in the future they'll also be pushing out dummy packages to remove the Sun JDK from user's machines altogether. See the mailing list post.

Re:Absolutely incorrect

[zsitvaij]

I stand corrected. That leaves yours the only factually correct post in this ./ discussion. I wish the mailing list post was the one linked and quoted in the summary.

If only Java were always Java

[David Gerard]

I work in a Java shop. We run Sun Java 6 on a mix of Solaris and Ubuntu. I'll be handrolling a deb from the Sun Java tarball precisely because not everything can be trusted to work identically between Sun Java 6 and OpenJDK 6.

We just recently hit a weird bug which turned out to be a "how did that ever work?" moment - revolving around different implementation-specific behaviours in Sun Java 6u24 for Solaris SPARC and Sun Java 6u26 for Linux.

We'll be moving to OpenJDK, but only after thorough testing. OpenJDK 6 is a proper Java, but we've discovered the hard way not to make any such move without thorough testing. Because programmers are human and bugs happen. Never trust, always verify.

Re:If only Java were always Java

[Anonymous Coward]

A serious question, can Java EE 6 apps be developed and deployed (e.g. using glassfish) using OpenJDK?

Re:If only Java were always Java

[DiegoBravo]

Same here. Recently I had some issues with fonts that were solved by switching to sun-java from openjdk (along other measures.) Sadly that issue was mandatory for my app.

For the time being, I'll have to disable all updates on those PRODUCTION machines in order to avoid the application from being stopped.

I don't understand why Cannonical can't just show a message declaring sun-jdk as deprecated.

Re:If only Java were always Java

[Anonymous Coward]

We had a bunch of problems with OpenJDK, specifically:

- NIO wasn't as mature and we'd hit a number of 100% CPU bugs (using Netty)
- OpenJDK bundles mozilla rhino under the rhino package, which means if you use a different version, you need to manually delete the js.jar from the distribution
- Some weird reflection issues

We didn't spend a lot of time tracking down the issues, just switched to the Sun JDK

Re:If only Java were always Java

[David Gerard]

Yuh. I'm not looking forward to the testing process.

Re:If only Java were always Java

[Anonymous Coward]

I work in a Java shop. We run Sun Java 6 on a mix of Solaris and Ubuntu. I'll be handrolling a deb from the Sun Java tarball precisely because not everything can be trusted to work identically between Sun Java 6 and OpenJDK 6.

We just recently hit a weird bug which turned out to be a "how did that ever work?" moment - revolving around different implementation-specific behaviours in Sun Java 6u24 for Solaris SPARC and Sun Java 6u26 for Linux.

We'll be moving to OpenJDK, but only after thorough testing. OpenJDK 6 is a proper Java, but we've discovered the hard way not to make any such move without thorough testing. Because programmers are human and bugs happen. Never trust, always verify.

Actually, since Oracle's JDK7 is based off of OpenJDK 7, OpenJDK 7 is more of a "proper" Java than OpenJDK 6.

No More Ubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

Canonical has breached their trust with me. I am in the process of building a new PC - I will definitely not be installing Ubuntu this time. I am very shocked and very angry at this action from a company that is supposed to be upholding the principles of free software and computer freedom.

I did not give them permission to remove software that I have installed. I only signed up for updates, not crippling of functionality at the whim of some pencil-pushing dweeb at Canonical HQ.

This sort of behavior should result in an automatic death penalty - collective deinstallation of their OSes everywhere and refusal to recommend it to others.

Re:No More Ubuntu

[Kagetsuki]

You've completely misunderstood. Sun Java will no longer be available in the main repository, instead the alternative OpenJDK will be available in the main repositories. If you want Sun Java you can still get it, it's just not in the main repository. By the way, OpenJDK by the way is actually free as in freedom - distributing OpenJDK is holding up the principles of free software significantly more than the license encumbered Sun Java. And it's not just Ubuntu that did it, I recall Sun Java being taken out of Debian at some point years ago over licensing issues.

yOU BETTER lEAvE tHE sUn aLONE

[Anonymous Coward]

Go ahead steak my java rotten scumbag globalist thief I don't use it anyway. But try to remove the Sun and it's WAR!

Is sun-javaX-fonts now also unsupported?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this also mean that the sun-javaX-fonts (where X is the version) package won't be supported, which has the Lucida TrueType fonts. I rely on Lucida Sans Typewriter from this package

10.04 LTS

[Anonymous Coward]

I just did a synaptic update and it in fact upgraded sun-java6-jre and jdk, to 6.26-2lucid1.

Sorry,

[M0j0_j0j0]

I'm sorry, but, why do people use java? it's a pain, from every point of view.

Re:Sorry,

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but, why do people use java? it's a pain, from every point of view.

Why dont you go watch some power puff girls ey?

Re:Sorry,

[Anonymous Coward]

The APIs are simple and consistent. The toolchains and IDEs are mature and rock solid.

The better question is: Why do Linux distros keep shipping with their half-assed generic Java and not the real thing?

Can't VPN to work with either one anymore

[Anonymous Coward]

I was fighting with my release of ubuntu last week because of this. In summary, a coworker's machine is set up properly and seems to magically work.

I had a different experience that ultimately prevents me from having to use a windows machine for server work when I get assigned on call days. Spent two weeks getting refusals and windows-only auto-downloads from the VPN-starting website under my OpenJDK. Clicked around until an alternative page stated the lie that only red hat and open suse worked. Found the version number that they required, which is secifically older than what The current Ubuntu will inject your machine with, so extra downloads directly from Oracle were required to continue testing. Had issues just removing the Open JDK via the default Ubuntu Control Center in part because of current dependencies that required complex Synaptic interaction, and then needed to manually force the .so link to point to the new JRE after manual extraction into a dubious location due to the lack of an installer.

After all the work to pass a single test of getting the right version for my 64 bit OS, all I got was a cryptic failure icon that brought up a debug console starting that I had a bad magic number. The web later pointed me to scripts that claimed to get around this but there were ambiguous confirmations on the forums. I reckoned to have started out with an OS that isn't in the official support list anyway and just decided to defer to the windows empire and lug the dedicated work laptop home. To sum up, Network Connect from Juniper should have better Linux documentation and support and Ubuntu should have better Java support.

This Java tastes bitter... sugar?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah Java - how many times have our PCs and Servers been compromised because of the numerous security bugs.

And the code? Write once, fucked everywhere.

Remember : if Java had real garbage collection, it would delete all the crap that spewed from so-called 'java developers' , dump VM, and then delete itself.

Re:This Java tastes bitter... sugar?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah Windows - how many times have our PCs and Servers been compromised because of the numerous security bugs.

And the code? Write once and fucked up the ass repeatedly by his POS OS that has 0 days everyday.

No Revenue - No Product

[Anonymous Coward]

Oracle's Purpose is to make big dollar for Mr Ellison, Shareholders and employees. The JVM does the opposite: It reduces their profit.
I knew Mr Ellison would do that.

Sad goodbye?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe, Ca-hey-nonny-nonny-ical got fed up polishing and packaging that great steamer called 'Java'.

If you can't understand C++, then go work as a shelf-stacker, burger flipper. Don't pretend you can program by getting away with it using Java.

Re:Sad goodbye?

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be one of those little shits that thinks they know C++ because they got a hello world to compile. The reality is that you're a piece of shit that needs to compensate because of your lack of intelligence. Sucks you're not living the dream, isn't it, you little sad man. You're a fake, you dipshit and we all know it.

Re:Sad goodbye?

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh - at least he got the hello world program to compile.

'Tards like you need momma's help just to post on slashdot, and wipe the drool from the mouth between keystrokes.

The scary thought it that in some parts of the world you mouthbreathers might even have a vote!

Automatic Updates are being forced by Canonical

[salemboot]

Automatic Updates are being forced. One of the new updates I saw the other day, UNATTENDED UPDATES.

Re:Automatic Updates are being forced by Canonical

[Kagetsuki]

That's optional and I don't think it's enabled by default. It's not enabled on my workstation and I don't ever remember disabling it but I know I set it to "critical security updates" on my servers.

Uncool

[nurb432]

I can understand pulling it from the repositories for future installs, but from a user that installed it while the license was still in effect? Really uncool.

Aside from pissing people off in general, just think of all the production servers they may kill by doing this. And the lost customers, time, money..

Re:Uncool

[colinrichardday]

As others have mentioned, Canonical can no longer provide updates, which means that it cannot fix the current vulnerabilities. If you had appendicitis, would you complain to a doctor who performed an appendectomy?

Should people running servers have automatic updates enabled?

Re:Uncool

[DragonWriter]

I can understand pulling it from the repositories for future installs, but from a user that installed it while the license was still in effect? Really uncool.

Its a security update, where, had they still had a license to distribute the software, they would have removed the old version and replaced it with the fixed version. Since they don't have the license, you have to do the second part yourself if you apply the update. Like all updates, you can choose not to apply it.

OpenJDK

[Anonymous Coward]

i wonder if the users of Ubuntu / Linux can still download a Java Development kit from www.javasoft.com. Or maybe they can use OpenJDK instead.

openjdk has issues though

[MoFoQ]

dunno about this.
I ran into an issue lately that only happens with OpenJDK (specifically OpenJDK's implementation of Java Webstart) which was only remedied by installing .....gawd...loathe to say it..."Oracle" Java and by removing OpenJDK.

Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers: the U-Man

[Anonymous Coward]

Checking the article shows that Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers is behind Canonical/Ubuntu actions. Oracle's actions regarding the JDK have been known, planned, and widely distributed.

I would advise Ubuntu users to ignore Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers' Ubuntu update for JDK. Seems that Mr Deslauriers has convolved OpenJDK, which Ubuntu users have been able to install for some time now, with JavaJDK (Sun) into a security problem with thoughts of "security holes". Kinda like "bad time for a whore to get religion".

Since Ubuntu, like any other GNU Linux distrobution can be costumized as users desire, Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers' planned actions constitute a deliberate act of cracking/hacking computer systems, which he does not own, with malicious intent.

Kill Java....

[Anonymous Coward]

...seriously, get rid of Java and stop encouraging people to use it. Replace it with what you ask? Anything. Everytime I visit a website that uses Java on the backend I can certainly tell I'm on a Java website because it is slow as fuck.

Could Java be packaged like Flash?

[jeremybar]

It seems like the flashplugin-installer Ubuntu package doesn't include the actual flash bits themselves, but rather contains a script named flashplugin-installer which goes and download the flash bits directly off Adobe's website, and installs the .so in the correct place, sets up symlinks, etc.

Now the question is: Can the new Java license permit this kind of mechanism? If so, that could be a workaround.

Re:Oracle needs to be less stupid and less greedy.

[Sipper]

First - I want to see in the license where it requires them to pull it
off systems.

This was followable via the links in the original article.

Oracle has ended the DLJ, the "Distributor License for Java".
http://jdk-distros.java.net/
http://robilad.livejournal.com/90792.html

Second - What the hell are they going to replace it with? Are they saying
you have to download and install Java manually? OpenJDK
supposedly doesn't work with all things.

That's true; there are certain known issues with OpenJDK and basically Oracle is saying "it'll just have to do".

Third - What does this mean for Ubuntu derivatives like Mint? Are they
going to have to pull the jdk as well?

Yes, and that's exactly what's been happening, because there's no other choice.

Re:Great one more package I need to manage by hand

[maxwell demon]

What I don't understand is why Canonical doesn't do for Java what SuSE did for the NVidia drivers (I don't know if Ubuntu does or did the same; I've never used Ubuntu on an NVidia system): Make a package which does not contain the actual code, but an installer which downloads it from the official web site and installs it. That way you both obey the license (download to install only from original source web page) and give the benefits of package management.

I wished Unity's "licence" would expire.

[Anonymous Coward]

Along with Firefox and Gnome3's so Ubuntu would be usable again.

Too late, I'm already posting this from Windows 7 and Chrome.

Why not make empty sun-java6 depend on OpenJDK?

[tepples]

They have to because the current package is vulnerable to remote code execution and they aren't allowed to distribute the fix.

If OpenJDK is becoming the official Oracle-blessed distribution, then why not put out a final release of empty sun-java6-* that depends on OpenJDK, so that the package is transitioned over on next restart (or sooner)?

Portable != usable

[tepples]

C is the most portable language.

This may be true, but just because a language is portable doesn't mean that the facilities provided by the language alone meet one's needs. The input and output facilities specified in the C99 standard consist solely of stdin, stdout, stderr, and a file system without directories and without a way to enumerate files. Because this is not sufficient for mobile, workstation, or server tasks, C runtime environments extend this with POSIX+X11 or nonstandard extensions or both. Microsoft refuses to implement POSIX+X11 as a standard feature in its operating systems, having left SUA to rot.

And people complained about...

[Anonymous Coward]

And people complain about how Apple, Google, and in the future Microsoft can remotely kill apps. Why no outrage at Canonical?

Re:And people complained about...

[Ash-Fox]

And people complain about how Apple, Google, and in the future Microsoft can remotely kill apps. Why no outrage at Canonical?

Maybe because you can block it with a single liner?

No one who matters cares, and for good reason.

[Anonymous Coward]

Java is no longer "the future," and never fully realized that prediction anyway. Java is dead. Java has been dead for a few years now. Yes, massive amounts of Java code doing things out there, but it doesn't matter. Anything that Java can do, just about everything else does much better.

Useful information for those who have an issue

[reiscw]

There are two ways around this in Ubuntu 11.10 (and, I'm assuming, derivative distributions). One way is to install from a PPA (that's the most likely answer you'll get if you search for a remedy online). I don't really like that idea, so I sat down today, did some research, and figured out how to install the latest version (1.6.0-30) directly from the Oracle website. It is not a trivial process, if you are a relative amateur like I am. Why does an amateur like me care? Because a very common mathematics learning software (ALEKS) requires Sun Java to run. I teach using this software, and although I could run a VM to access their system, I'd rather not. If anyone cares, here's what to do, after you download the appropriate .bin file from Oracle:

chmod +x jre-6u30-linux-x64.bin
./jre-6u30-linux-x64.bin
sudo mkdir /opt/java
sudo mkdir /opt/java/64
sudo mv jre1.6.0_30/ /opt/java/64/jre1.6.0_30
sudo update-alternatives --install "/usr/bin/java" "java" "/opt/java/64/jre1.6.0_30/bin/java" 1
sudo update-alternatives --set java /opt/java/64/jre1.6.0_30/bin/java
cd /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
sudo ln -s /opt/java/64/jre1.6.0_30/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.so


PS I'm sure there's a better way to do this, but it worked. I pieced this together off of the web - none of it is original.

Thoughts on Java from a disinterested party

[Bent Mind]

I received a message a few months ago from Gentoo that Oracle had changed their licensing back to a distribution unfriendly version. Gentoo turned on the fetch restriction switch and gave me a link to download the needed files. I followed the link and read their new license only to discover that it forbade installing Java on Netbooks and cell phones. Three of the computers I maintain are Netbooks. I opted to skip updating Java until I learned more. Then life happened and I stopped paying attention to Java.

Today, I see this headline and I follow it to see what is going on. The comments seem to fall into two groups, Windows fan boys and OpenJDK discussion. OpenJDK is new to me and useful information. I've never heard of it before. Unfortunately, "emerge -s jdk" doesn't show an OpenJDK. I'll have to research it more. Perhaps it has a different name in Portage?

I originally installed Sun's JDK because my bank said I needed Sun's specific implementation to access my account on-line. I also worked for a company at the time that insisted that any data you wanted to capture needed to have an application coded in Java. I had played around with the idea of learning the language for work. That was given up when I figured out that any application I wrote wouldn't be approved for work use. I just did what most people did there, keep the data in Excel and away from the databases. It was that, or wait for the Dev team's multi-year backlog to clear.

I'll have to see what I can learn about OpenJDK and see if it covers my banking needs...

In the Beginning, it was a Command Line..!

[achlorophyl]

I like to see the fire and the energy swirling around Linux and Java in this discussion. My brother uses Mac's exclusively, because he works in the movies using Pro Tools -- and even if Pro Tools worked on Linux, he is committed and says "Apple operates by capitalizing on a lifestyle... How could the open source community match Apple, who has untold engineers, paid, working to make Mac's easy to use, and powerful?" Mac's seem a bit pricey to me. I've heard the OS is based on a *nix (FreeBSD). Also, their hardware supposedly works well because being the proprietary corporation for the hardware and software, Apple can dominate its suppliers and configurations, and say, "We want a battery that will last seven hours" or whatnot. All praise to Apple for making a good product that is derived from *nix..! However, their anti-competitive legal behavior with regard to Android disturbs me... Don't be evil..! A tablet is a generic category of nature..! You think _YOU_ invented a flat computer, or that only you have the right to make them?? Insane..! Linux, however, is the wave of the Future Earth... Google runs on it, as do the FBI and the National Security Agency (Security Enhanced Linux).. This guy Salus wrote a history of open source -- http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20051013231901859 I think it is fascinating. My parents bought a Win7 laptop, which got fried by a virus within weeks of powering up. I convinced them to let me install Ubuntu. My Dad liked it fairly well, but he's a big iTunes user, so eventually my brother was convinced to give them one of his old Mac laptops. Now Dad can run iTunes, look at the super-slick Mac interface, and be reasonably certain that he might not get killed by another virus. Any suggestions on what I should do with the extra Linux box? Maybe bring it to my apartment, and experiment with using it as a firewall...(Oh, doesn't a firewall require two network interfaces? I don't think the little Toshiba lappy thought of that yet..) IPTables, packet mangling, Network Address Translation anyone? My XP box (Windows XP Media Center Edition) has an odd habit of complaining loudly that no firewall is turned on, but ironically it doesn't let me turn it on for long. I live in fear that my big box will get fried. I run Avast AV and do boot-time scans kind of frequently, and I am really reluctant to visit URL's I don't know. My Ubuntu lappy is my pride and joy. I always install all the updates as soon as possible. How could _I_ second-guess Canonical? This is what they do for a living, this is their profession. I am simply a user. Although I know how to program, and Java is my favorite language. I figure Oracle or whoever will work out a way to make Java work cross platform. That was Java's promise, wasn't it? A Virtual Machine running on a bunch of different OS's -- which your Java code would ride barebacked on and always work..! It disturbs me to hear shit talked on Java. I have a lot of study invested in it. What is the alternative? Well, Linux for instance is written in C.. Maybe if I ever decide to develop software, I could bite the bullet and do the menial labor of compiling it differently for each OS.. Or -- I don't give a shit about Windows or Mac OS -- why not simply go full force, full Linux -- and stop developing anything for any other OS?

A Fair Trade

[Anonymous Coward]

If Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers is intent on destroying Ubuntus users computers then Ubuntu’s Marc Deslauriers must be welcome to be removed from existance and life.

Vader

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't figure out why nobody has yet done the:

"We are altering the agreement. Pray we do not alter it further"

meme.

Oh, yeah, that's right, it outdated. Silly me :-)

Not optional

[salemboot]

It's there, install 10.04 and run Update Manager along with checking for the lastest updates. Do not allow it to update while it installs. I don't remember if it asks to download updates during installation. But you'll see the unattended updates package in the upgrades. The only two packages that need upgrades are kernel and firefox. This crap is out of hand.

I agreed to no such thing

[msobkow]

I agreed to the deployment of timely security and software updates, not to the arbitrary removal and resulting breakage of my systems. If Canonical proceeds with removing the sun-java packages from my machine instead of merely removing them from their distribution repositories, I'll be removing Canonical and going with a distro that understands the importance of not breaking user's machines.

However, I seriously doubt either Oracle or Ubuntu would be so stupid as to break production systems around the world in such a fashion.

I don't blame Oracle for dropping Canonical's distribution. Historically they've always provided their own installers. But they really need to start providing .deb installers as well as .rpm. Using "alien" may work, but it's rather distasteful for production systems to do so. Application and server producers don't want to be in the business of packaging software for installation. And Oracle should really reconsider the benefits of having an automatic distribution engine like Ubuntu's repositories, or start up their own repository server that can be trivially added to the set that Ubuntu queries every time it runs, the same way you can add repositories to Eclipse.

Re:I agreed to no such thing

[rtfa-troll]

This is a security fix. Oracle has taken away Canonical's license for this software package (they don't want it distributed any more since it's outdated). Serious security faults have been found in this version of Java. Given that they can't update it (not having a license from Oracle) Canonical has decided that they have no option other than to remove it. This doesn't cause any major inconvenience, remember that it's trivial to simply install the old version from Oracle's web pages; you can even just do a simple pin of the old package.

The promise with automated security fixes is that "we will do whatever it takes to more or less guarantee that your system does not contain old and outdated versions of our software, even if this risks breaking things". Places which need things not to break have to run their own internal testing followed by pushing the updates themselves. Practically all the major OS vendors, RedHat, Debian, Apple, Mint, Canonical, CentOS, Microsoft, Oracle and SUSE agree about this. I have had RedHat remove old not working distributions. In fact, if I remember right, at EOL, RedHat normally sends out a package which forces a system shutdown.

Even if you do have automated updates, the vendors help you to avoid problems by announcing in advance that they will retire a package. Then, as in this case, everybody who reads the vendor announcement mailing list gets a warning and can block the update if they want to.

OpenJDK != Sun JDK

[Anonymous Coward]

While most may think it's 6 of one or half-dozen of the other, it's really not. I have yet to have an app that worked correctly with OpenJDK. In each case, Sun's JDK was the fix to get the app working. If you doubt this, try running Minecraft with OpenJDK. It doesn't work.

Can anyone explain why Canonical would 'pull' the app from systems where it was already distributed? It appears that the distribution license is for the ability to continue distributing but wouldn't affect systems that have previously been distributed to.

This business with Canonical pulling the app from working systems is a bit too much like Microsoft's behavior for my liking. Looks like it might be time to switch up which distribution I use if this becomes standard procedure for them.

Re:Oracle needs to be less stupid and less greedy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Grammar Nazi here:

U might like your Forth with an U instead of going forth to do battle against my Army of the Undead.

Signing off to go find Hitler in the Hinterlands.