You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   28-52   53-77   78-102   103-113     
 
Author Message
25 new of 113 responses total.
twenex
response 53 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 27 22:09 UTC 2006

Re: #52. Are you trying to make a point, or just insult people?
keesan
response 54 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 01:18 UTC 2006

I think #52 is saying that java is resource intensive and therefore not
suitable for a slow crowded system like grex.
twenex
response 55 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 01:29 UTC 2006

I misspoke myself. The comments in #53 were addressed to the writer of #51.
mcnally
response 56 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 01:35 UTC 2006

 #52 appears to confuse Java, the programming language, with Java applets,
 executable code collections which are most often run embedded in a web
 browser.  Java has plenty of other uses, and is, in fact, a useful
 technology, which is why I find it odd that mic can't put together a
 more convincing argument in its favor.
naftee
response 57 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 04:14 UTC 2006

i confused twenex with scholar in resp:53.  it tripped me out to think that
KEESAN was responding to SCHOLAR>< and like ; whoa.
scholar
response 58 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 06:03 UTC 2006

I think twenex's name is dumb.

After all, planes don't actually FLY at the airports!

They just land there and hang out.  :(
cross
response 59 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 06:05 UTC 2006

Java is an all right programming language, but my sense of it is that its
popularity has declined in the last few years.  All in all, it is, in some
senses, an architectural step backwards (I mean, why couldn't they just gut
it up and make integers objects, already?  Still trying too hard for that
efficiency straw man).  A more interesting technology to me is Ruby or Python
or another scripting language.  If you want to have fun, that's where it's
at.  That said, I'd agree that another operating system that supported more
or better software wouldn't be a bad thing for grex.
spooked
response 60 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 09:28 UTC 2006

Java, which I have been associated with professionally for nearly a 
decade, continues to grow in popularity.  You can earn really large 
amounts of money if you have advanced Java skills - particularly scarce 
at the moment, in terms of talented people versus projects in industry, 
are talented people in the J2EE arena.  The supply of work is vastly 
outnumbering the talented/skilled pool set.  Java is massive - from smart 
portable devices to inter-enterprise applications - Java is thriving.  
One of the major resources I believe where Grex can benefit from offering 
Java is attracting and assisting budding Java developers (compared to unix 
shell script and C programming skills, the market is 10-fold+ after Java 
skills).  Some of the coolest web applications can be built for Grex using 
Java technologies such as JSP, JDBC, and existing opensource codebases - 
abundant! - out there.  The level of coolness and time to build such 
applications in Java vastly surpasses anything which can be built in C, 
Perl, Python, Ruby - I have worked with them all.  In some of the coolest 
operating systems, such as Solaris 10, you can easily constrain 
users/processes/applications to a size of the resource pool (such as 
RAM).  I think I have responded, in brief, to everyones major points.
remmers
response 61 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 14:54 UTC 2006

Pros and cons of Java vs. other languages aside, I think it's part of
Grex's public service mission to install something as widely used as
Java if we can.  Can anybody think of a reason why I shouldn't install
kaffe-1.0.6 here?  It's a Java package for OpenBSD 3.8.  See
http://www.openbsd.org/3.8_packages/i386/kaffe-1.0.6.tgz-long.html

(By the way, if anyone has anything to say about blogs, this is the
"Brainstorming: Grex Blogs" item.  This announcement brought to you as a
public service.)
other
response 62 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 17:05 UTC 2006

The greatest advantage that I can think of to installing Java on grex is
that tools available in Java make unit testing possible for any coding
projects that are considered for system-wide deployment on Grex.

Unit testing is a way of programming which, if done properly, can
identify and thereby allow the complete elimination of buggy code prior
to deployment.  If Grex installs a Java framework to support unit
testing, it may make it much easier for people to contribute tools and
applications in a way that the staff will feel comfortable adding
capabilities to the system without risking a lot of follow-up work
tracking down and fixing bugs.
scholar
response 63 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:18 UTC 2006

I'm a terrible person.  :(
cross
response 64 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:24 UTC 2006

I tried to address Unit Testing with grexsoft, but no one but me was ever
interested.  I take exception to Mic's assertion that Java is more efficient
to program in (as opposed to machine efficiency) than, say, Python or Ruby.
I do note that, according to a cursory search on Freshmeat, the union of
Ruby, Python, and Perl projects has the about a thousand more projects in it
than the set of Java related projects (at around 4600 projects or so; that's
about the same as the number of C++ projects, and probably half the number
of C projects).

But that's neither here nor there.  As a system, we should be trying to
get a current, modern JRE and development environment running on grex.
That means an operating system with developers more likely to be more
responsive than, ``you're on your own'' or ``we don't do that here, and
neither should you.''
cross
response 65 of 113: Mark Unseen   Feb 28 21:25 UTC 2006

(Actually, I take that back; Bruce Howard did some work with integrating
grexsoft into grexdoc, but I'm not sure how it ever turned out.)
spooked
response 66 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 09:11 UTC 2006

Yay, finally some clearer thinking from folk.

Ruby is a VERY promising language, Dan, especially Ruby on Rails 
framework... BUT, it seriously cannot compete with Java now or in the next 
decade.
cross
response 67 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 19:05 UTC 2006

Well, let's agree to disagree.
spooked
response 68 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 1 21:23 UTC 2006

No problemo.
remmers
response 69 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 2 14:39 UTC 2006

Hmmm.  I installed the kaffe-1.0.6.tgz package, but the only output of the
javac and java commands seems to be core dumps...  :(
cross
response 70 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 2 21:51 UTC 2006

(regarding #68; Well, except that we are agreed that grex needs to move to
a better supported OS!)

Regarding #69; Kaffe is also no where near the JDK in terms of
sophistification.  OpenBSD really doesn't support a Java that's worthy of the
title.
spooked
response 71 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 3 09:49 UTC 2006

Geez, Dan - you're clever and street wise, too :)
cross
response 72 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 3 13:58 UTC 2006

What can I say?  It was all those years living on the lower east side.  :-)
janc
response 73 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 11 20:59 UTC 2006

I think one of the main promises of Java was machine independence.  You
could implement a package with functionality like, say, Microsoft Money,
and have it run transparently on any machine or OS.  The lack of an
adequate Java for OpenBSD is a bad sign for OpenBSD, but it is also a
bad sign for Java.  OpenBSD isn't really very different from Linux or
Solaris or FreeBSD, so I assume that the roadblocks to Java are
primarily legal.  If there are legal encumberances on Java so great that
a version for OpenBSD cannot be easily made available, then I think that
throws into question Java practical machine independence.
janc
response 74 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 11 21:01 UTC 2006

I have done quite a bit of work on the backtalk/sage interface this
week.  Mostly I've been working on the configuration tools, which are
fairly hard to design, since I'm going for massive configurability. 
Still have a ways to go before I can demo anything though.
spooked
response 75 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 12 00:20 UTC 2006

Sun openly publishes its JVM specification.  It is not obliged, and it 
would not make good business sense, for it to make a version of its 
JVM for every available platform.  It has done so for the three most 
important platforms - Windows (greatest user base), Linux (fastest 
growing, open-source), and Solaris (its own impressive OS).  The fact 
that some group has not ported it properly to OpenBSD, in my opinion, is 
more a reflection on the lack of interest in OpenBSD as a a development 
environment.  From what I know (and I am coming from a security 
background), OpenBSD's primary use is as the core of Bastion firewalls.
Thus, in conclusion - (1) There is no legal reason, that I am aware of, 
that prevents a port to OpenBSD or any platform of the JVM, and (2) 
OpenBSD is NOT, both seen by many and in reality, a serious development 
platform.
cross
response 76 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 12 14:30 UTC 2006

I think the lack of Java on OpenBSD is, as Mic said, more a reflection of the
status (or lack thereof) of OpenBSD in the eyes of those in a position to make
a Java port.  But it also stems from some technical failings of OpenBSD, like
the lack of a real, kernel-level POSIX compliant threads implementation. 
Yeah, there's a library that sort of does the right thing by turning
everything into non-blocking calls and trying to multiplex, but the entire
system can still freeze on some system calls.

Java is quite complex, and porting it to a new platform, particularly one only
subtly different from another that's well supported, is tricky.
khamsun
response 77 of 113: Mark Unseen   Mar 13 19:37 UTC 2006

Re #75:

hey spooked, not to be rude, that's not the intention, but reading this
thread and all that about Java on grex, I'll say:
--> you are pissing me off with Java :) , but that's just me...
--> I'm no software engineer, nor computer professional (not now at
least) but well the topic Java and BSD's is an old one.
The whole availability of JVM/JRE native engines outside
Solaris/Win32/Linux/Aix/Irix/Hp-Ux/UnixWare and to some extend FreeBSD,
is because Sun imposed license limiting redistribution.
It's all on Sun's side.

Here's a fucking native and working JVM/JRE for OpenBSD-i386 (was
compiled on 3.7 but runs as well on 3.8), demos and all:
http://bsd.abravo.org/JAVA/OpenBSD/3.7/i386/jdk-1.4.2p3.tgz

it's easily buidable by a simple "make" in the so-called OpenBSD ports
system.For NetBSD it's in the wip-pkgsrc.A binary tarball:
http://bsd.abravo.org/JAVA/NetBSD/NetBSD-2.1/i386/jdk14-1.4.2.7.tgz

The build process is exactly the same than in the Sun specs.
About Solaris/OpenSolaris: the current JVM builds upon Xsun + Motif,
which makes licensing troubles, because Motif which is needed for the
build is no free stuff.One can build with Lesstif and Xorg, well that's
yet another story....Just to point out, Sun can still do better.

So the OpenBSD tarball I provide in the link is, stricto sensu, not
downloadable.Yet only me and the readers here will know, and anyways, I
don't care, Sun can well sue me if they want.
The point is: it's a native JVM (and the corresponding JRE) v. 1.4.2, so
the question is over: native OpenBSD JVM does exist and work.
 0-24   25-49   28-52   53-77   78-102   103-113     
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss