GNU/Andrew's Blog - Latest Comments

Re: GNU Classpath 0.99 Released!

Andïï — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 20:13:34 -0000

Yes. This is my bad. I need to remember how to update this and get the release notes up. Sorry for the delay.

Re: IcedTea 2.1 Released! (OpenJDK7 ~u3 release)

Кирилл Толкачёв — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 08:29:18 -0000

Error raised during build icedtea-2.1:
ln: accessing `libjvm.so.1': Too many levels of symbolic links
/usr/bin/chcon: failed to get security context of `libjvm.so': Too many levels of symbolic links
Build on PPC64. How to solve this problem?
PS: problem raise in makefile vm.make:
doubtful line:
rm -f libjvm.so.1; ln -s libjvm.so libjvm.so.1; \
[ -f libjvm.so ] || { ln -s libjvm.so libjvm.so; ln -s libjvm.so.1 libjvm.so.1; };

Re: GNU Classpath 0.99 Released!

Pietro Braione — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:25:13 -0000

It's great to see a new version, but... why the Classpath homepage has not been updated? There is no announcement (the last news is about 0.98) nor, which is even stranger, a link for downloading the current version. It still reports that the current version is 0.98!

Re: GNU Classpath 0.99 Released!

Andïï — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 06:48:29 -0000

GNU Classpath has remained in active development, so it is only right that there should be a new release to get this new features and bug fixes out to users. One advantage Classpath does have OpenJDK is that it's a true Free Software project run by the Free Software Foundation, whereas OpenJDK is subject to the whims of Oracle and still lacks basics such as a bug database and equal commit access. This is one of the primary reasons IcedTea continues to exist.

Re: GNU Classpath 0.99 Released!

Guest — Tue, 20 Mar 2012 05:21:08 -0000

Which advantage have GNU Classpath over OpenJDK/IcedTea?
I think since OpenJDK, GNU Classpath makes no longer sense. So I am surprised, that now a new GNU Classpath version is published again.

Re: IcedTea 2.1 Released! (OpenJDK7 ~u3 release)

Andrew Haley — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 12:03:02 -0000

> 1) is the IcedTea project going to make binaries
> for all the major linux distros and run the TCK
> against them? Or do you expect each to get the
> TCK and do a build and run agains distro t that,
> it would be much better for the open source java
> on Linux community if there was one place where
> you can get binaries that are certified mainly
> because then the open source Linux java user
> community would have one place to congregate.

I really very strongly disagree with this. The
distros themselves are far better at building and
packaging OpenJDK than the IcedTea project ever
could be. In addition, they control the updates
channel. I would never encourage anyone to use
such a downloaded binary if a proper distro
package were available.

Re: IcedTea 2.1 Released! (OpenJDK7 ~u3 release)

Andïï — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 06:11:45 -0000

1. No, the IcedTea project provides source releases only. Distros then package this and others are free to use it and possibly contribute back to the project.
We don't have any control over the openjdk.java.net site. This is maintained by Oracle, so, while personally I may share some of your feelings about it, there's not much we can do. We try to maintain a more community-oriented site with our IcedTea wiki: http://icedtea.classpath.org
2. It's a community project. To my knowledge, IcedTea is or has been used in Fedora, RHEL, Debian, Ubuntu, Gentoo, SuSE, ArchLinux, BLFS and Slackware and the plugin/javaws component (IcedTea-Web) has been used on FreeBSD.
3. The SPEC files for building the Fedora RPMs are public (http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/... and http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/... but there are other environmental factors involved in building source code (compiler/dependency versions, installed software) that make it difficult to say whether the resulting binary would be identical.
4. If by 'official tck certified binary' you mean the Fedora RPMs, then yes, see the SPEC files.

As to your previous question about the differences between OpenJDK and the proprietary JDK, it's difficult for us to tell accurately as obviously we don't have the source for the latter. But you can look through the source of OpenJDK and find ifdef/ifndef OPENJDK sections in the Makefiles which point to some differences. To my knowledge, the proprietary JDK still uses its own proprietary graphics rendering, font rendering and colour management. I'm not sure if they've finally switched from their own proprietary sound driver to Gervill in 7, but certainly it was the former with 6. I've just noted from the sources that 7 also has com.oracle.security.ucrypto which isn't in OpenJDK.

Re: OpenJDK, IcedTea & NSS

Andïï — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 20:54:46 -0000

I'm not sure what you're referring to as 'libpkcs11'. The NSS provider used is here: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk...

Re: IcedTea 2.1 Released! (OpenJDK7 ~u3 release)

Ams — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:15:09 -0000

Thanks for clarifying that the " a pass only indicates that a
particular build is compatible when run in a particular environment." I have a couple of more questions.

1) is the IcedTea project going to make binaries for all the major linux distros and run the TCK against them? Or do you expect each to get the TCK and do a build and run agains distro t that, it would be much better for the open source java on Linux community if there was one place where you can get binaries that are certified mainly because then the open source Linux java user community would have one place to congregate.

openjdk.java.net seems to be designed for developers and not the winder end user community, I can't go there to get binaries, and learn what's new in releases ... etc.

openjdk.java.net has too many sub projects, I have to figure out which sub project to subscribe too it is just not user friendly.

Also having a community site for people running openjdk in production would be a great booster to confidence that hey this code is production ready.

2) Is IcedTea is a Redhat project or is it being supported by the other linux distros?

3) if I was to download the tarball linked from your blog post would and i was to build it on Fedora or RHEL would I ened up with exactly the same binaries as the official binary. i.e. is there a way for me to replicate the official build from source.

4) in general are the source tarballs released the same ones that the official tck certified binary is based on?

Re: IcedTea 2.1 Released! (OpenJDK7 ~u3 release)

Andrew Haley — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 13:03:11 -0000

> 1) Does pass the Java TCK before it is released, whats the policy
> around that? Can it the Iced Tea Open JDK be considered a certified
> java implementation, is it safe to run a production server with.

We run the Java TCK at Red Hat, but a pass only indicates that a
particular build is compatible when run in a particular environment.
So, if you run Fedora's OpenJDK build you can be sure that it has
passed the TCK. That guarantee can't be extended to any random build
that you do yourself.

> 2) Is there a list somewhere of what extra's oracle adds on top of
> the openJDK to get the certified oracle jdk?

None of which I am aware.

> 3) The way that the development process works is it possible that
> oracle has security fixes in their updates that don't exist in iced
> tea?

Of course it's possible, but it would be a really shitty thing for
Oracle to do. As far as I know they have never done such a thing, and
I wouldn't expect them to.

Re: IcedTea 2.1 Released! (OpenJDK7 ~u3 release)

Ams — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 04:30:48 -0000

Congrats, on this release. There are few things that are not clear to me about Iced Tea Open JDK these are.

1) Does pass the Java TCK before it is released, whats the policy around that? Can it the Iced Tea Open JDK be considered a certified java implementation, is it safe to run a production server with.

2) Is there a list somewhere of what extra's oracle adds on top of the openJDK to get the certified oracle jdk?

3) The way that the development process works is it possible that oracle has security fixes in their updates that don't exist in iced tea?

Re: OpenJDK, IcedTea & NSS

Ams — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 04:22:36 -0000

In libpkcs11 open source? where is the home page for the project quick googling turned up man pages but not the project homepage.

Re: OpenJDK, IcedTea & NSS

Andïï — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:58:28 -0000

The default provider is SunJCE (com.sun.crypto.provider.SunJCE) and is pure Java as far as I'm aware. Notably it supports more cipher modes than the NSS implementation; e.g. AES/ECB is provided by SunJCE but not SunNSS. I'm not aware of any use of openssl.

I've not looked at Calipher, but I'll try to.

Re: OpenJDK, IcedTea & NSS

Aleksandar Kostadinov — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 16:36:52 -0000

what is the defaul openjdk crypto provider? I thought openssl already supports assembly accelerated AES encryption through loading one of the available kernel modules.

Re: OpenJDK, IcedTea & NSS

Blair Zajac — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 13:28:44 -0000

Have you looked at using Google Caliper to do microbenchmarking? It handles many issues that makes it harder to get good results from small Java benchmarks. Worth going through the wiki http://code.google.com/p/calip...

Re: IcedTea6 1.11 Released!

Marcus — Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:25:26 -0000

Would it be possible to provide a link for the binary. I have a IONICS PlugComputer and would like to try the arm JIT.

Re: IcedTea6 1.11 Released!

Andii — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 13:22:24 -0000

You can build without a pre-built OpenJDK using gcj & IcedTea's build system. This is the default.

Re: IcedTea6 1.11 Released!

Xerxes Rånby — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:44:57 -0000

The best way to satisfy all the OpenJDK build dependencies on Debian/Ubuntu are to first run "apt-get build-dep openjdk-6" before starting the build.

You can look at the buildbots individual configure and compile build steps to see the exact configure options used.
Of course you need an already built openjdk (with a stable jit) to quickly build a new one. kind of a chicken and egg problem.

I would like to offer source used and binarys produced by the ARM buildbots, I have to solve some infrastructural issues to make this happen.

Get in touch by joining the #openjdk irc channel on irc.oftc.net

Re: IcedTea6 1.11 Released!

Xerxes Rånby — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:34:52 -0000

Hi Jim, you may look at the top of the configure and compile step of the buildbots individual build runs to check how the buildbots did it. Sorry for replying late, i was all busy compiling Eclipse last week using these IcedTea6-1.11 OpenJDK JVM for use during the OpenJDK on ARM demo at Fosdem 2012.

We would like to offer daily binary builds in the future but we have to solve some infrastructure issues to allow binary and sources for the daily builds to be available to end users hand in hand before we can make this happen.

Please get in touch and join #openjdk on irc.oftc.net if you have any questions. It would be great if we could coordinate any benchmark setups to produce reproducible benchmark runs.

Re: The ARM Port Without a Name Passes the TCK

Sarah Woodall — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:20:18 -0000

Andrew Haley explaining how he dealt with volatile 64-bit data: http://youtu.be/3tsBJH4xEws

Re: The ARM Port Without a Name Passes the TCK

Andrew Haley — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:29:10 -0000

There isn't a field of use restriction. And no, it really isn't going to be permanently known as APWaN if I can help it! Ed has always called it the "ARM assembler port".

Re: The ARM Port Without a Name Passes the TCK

Andïï — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:46:39 -0000

Well, nothing's definite yet but we can use it as a placeholder for now at least :-D

Re: The ARM Port Without a Name Passes the TCK

DamonHD — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:46:22 -0000

Hey, I'm glad you went with the flow and will use "APWaN", though maybe we could argue about the case of the "a"? B^>

Good talk, thanks, I enjoyed it.

Rgds

Damon

Re: The ARM Port Without a Name Passes the TCK

m1k0 — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 02:40:09 -0000

I waiting for JavaFX too :)

Re: The ARM Port Without a Name Passes the TCK

Anon — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:56:02 -0000

Where in the OpenJDK Community TCK License Agreement for Java SE 7 (see http://openjdk.java.net/legal/... is there a field of use restriction?