Versions of Java revisited
Sat, 19 Aug 2000 22:40:17 +0100
"Jeroen C. van Gelderen" wrote:
> Ben Laurie wrote:
> > "Mark S. Miller" wrote:
> > >
> > > Since May, there has been an alpha port of Sun's JDK 1.2 to FreeBSD
> > > http://www.freebsd.org/java/dists/12.html . We also seem blocked on moving
> > > to Cryptix JCE because of a bug in the Java 1.1 compatibility code. Until
> > > we move to Cryptix JCE, we can't support JDK 1.3. Given a choice between
> > > supporting Java 1.1 vs Java 1.3, I'd prefer to support 1.3. In light of
> > > the FreeBSD Java announcement (an old announcement, but I only now took a
> > > good look), I'm wondering how strong the reaction still is on the list to
> > > dropping 1.1. Speak now or forever forsake 1.1.
> > >
> > > If we forsake 1.1, I propose to make sure everything works with 1.2 and 1.3
> > > until there's a 1.3 on FreeBSD, but I'll strongly recommend using 1.3 if at
> > > all possible. As soon as we can drop 1.2 as well, I'd like to.
> > >
> > > Why the hell are the FreeBSD people bothering with 1.2 rather than jumping
> > > to 1.3?
> > Having been involved in the whole horrible mess of getting 1.x (x > 1)
> > on to FreeBSD _at all_, all I can say is "don't ask"!
> Ben: It seems that the FreeBSD-Java porting team members
> (not me) disagree with this statement. They used a less
> flattering description but the bottom line is that the
> people who are actually doing the porting seem to think
> you are giving yourself a bit more credit than you deserve.
Hmm. Now I read this again, I can see I expressed myself poorly. I'm not
intending to claim _anything_ to do with the actual porting of Java to
FreeBSD, just some leverage on persuading Sun to spring the code. Sorry,
Coming to ApacheCon Europe 2000? http://apachecon.com/