Gentoo Archives: gentoo-java

From: Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew@××××××××××.org>
To: Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldonkin@×××××.com>
Cc: gentoo-java@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-java] OpenJDK, IcedTea and Package Naming
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 01:21:07
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-java] OpenJDK, IcedTea and Package Naming by Robert Burrell Donkin
2008/9/13 Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldonkin@×××××.com>:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Andrew John Hughes > <gnu_andrew@××××××××××.org> wrote: >> It seems there has been some confusion over the naming of the ebuilds >> for OpenJDK/IcedTea >> support within Gentoo, so, at Petteri's request, this e-mail aims to >> clear things up and hopefully >> alleviate some of these issues. >> >> Understanding the naming really involves understanding the development >> of OpenJDK so far. >> The release of Sun's reference implementation of the Java SE platform >> was completed in May 2007, >> and this codebase was known as OpenJDK. This basically represents the >> current state of what >> will eventually become Java 1.7 or JDK7, the contents of which are >> still unknown as there is no >> JSR for this platform as yet. The platform specification does not >> include the plugin or webstart support, >> so, given the state of this code, it was not included. On initial >> release, about 4% of the code base >> was also missing, having to be replaced by proprietary binary plugs >> from one of the proprietary Sun JDKs. >> Thus, although we were much closer to a complete Free JDK, there were >> three major issues remaining: >> >> * The released code was for 1.7, not the 1.6 release actually in use, >> and it couldn't be certified as Java(TM). >> * The code couldn't be built Freely, preventing its use in Fedora, >> Debian and Ubuntu. >> * The plugin and webstart support which users would expect from a JDK >> were missing. >> >> Two of these issues were quickly solved by hackers at Red Hat who >> started the IcedTea project. This provided >> a way of building OpenJDK using existing Free Java runtimes such as >> GCJ and provided replacements for the >> encumbrances using code from GNU Classpath. gcjwebplugin was also >> modified to provide plugin support >> against Sun's applet code rather than GNU Classpath's, and the >> existing NetX project continued its development >> as part of IcedTea, providing webstart support. Resulting binaries >> shipped as a package named 'icedtea' in >> Fedora Core 8. >> >> Over time, OpenJDK and IcedTea continued to develop. Sun provided >> replacements for some of the encumbrances, >> mainly in the area of Java2D such as font and renderer support, and >> cryptography. IcedTea was kept up to date with >> each new OpenJDK cooked build, by modification of the existing >> patches. This continues today, with the latest >> IcedTea release being 1.7. Ebuilds for both 1.7 and the live >> Mercurial repository are held in java-experimental, as >> they provide a snapshot of 1.7 development rather than a completed JDK >> aimed at the user. >> >> In early 2008, Sun began the OpenJDK6 project to provide a Free 1.6 >> implementation, and allowed external developers >> (notably Red Hat) access to the Java Compatibility Kit (JCK) so that >> the resulting builds could be demonstrated to be >> compatible with the existing proprietary JDK6 builds provided by Sun. >> OpenJDK6 was created, not from the proprietary >> JDK6 tree (which would require another legal review on the epic scale >> already undertaken for the JDK7 code), but by >> taking the OpenJDK tree and removing new features added by Sun developers. >> >> The issues with building the code and the encumbrances remained with >> OpenJDK6 so a matching IcedTea6 tree was launched >> to provide the same level of support to the new code base. It is a >> build of IcedTea6 from Fedora that recently passed the JCK, >> finally proving that a certifiable Free JDK implementation can exist. >> Getting to this point was non-trivial, as the base of OpenJDK >> and then additional patching by IcedTea meant that the codebase was >> quite distinct from the proprietary JDK6 being shipped by >> Sun, notably with some of the Free replacements for the encumbrances >> being completely different code from the proprietary version >> in JDK6. >> >> In the java overlay, we currently have an ebuild for IcedTea6 1.2. >> This matches the name of the upstream project and version. There >> is also a live build in experimental, and 1.3 is likely to become >> available in the next few weeks. On IRC, some have expressed dislike >> for this naming, preferring including terms like 'OpenJDK' and the >> cooked build on which it is based. This is further confused by the >> binary builds in Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu now being called 'OpenJDK'. >> This isn't because they just felt like changing the name. >> Use of the 'OpenJDK' name is subject to the OpenJDK trademark license >> and requires fulfilling certain conditions, including the codebase >> being almost completely based on the tree from Sun. >> >> In Gentoo, we work at the source level in general, whereas the >> approach of Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu is from one of a binary package. >> With OpenJDK and IcedTea, this presents some differences. The most >> prominent is the use of the trademark license. With a binary >> build, the distro developer knows what is in the binary and whether it >> qualifies to be called OpenJDK. The source from which these binaries >> are built is still IcedTea6, as may be demonstrated via executing >> 'java -version'. With Gentoo, the presence of USE flags and local >> settings >> mean that we don't know what will result from the ebuild in binary >> form. Some builds will be roughly equivalent to the builds in Fedora, >> Debian >> and Ubuntu, but some may not. There is functionality in IcedTea, such >> as the ability to use CACAO instead of HotSpot, that would mean >> the resulting binary does not qualify to be called OpenJDK (such >> packages are called cacao-oj6 in Debian and Ubuntu for example). > > AIUI and IMNSHO *NO* local build from source qualifies. gentoo > *SHOULD* *NOT* expose users to risk by using trademarks etc for *ANY* > source build even from the sun tree. >
Maybe that's being a bit over cautious, but the problem generally is Sun thought of this with binary distribution in mind, not source. As with any legal agreement, the best solution is to consult a lawyer. I'm not one.
> BTW i'm on AMD64 which has very poor support from the sun java > codebase. are there any plans to add support for the harmony VM? >
What 'poor support'? IcedTea6 works fine for me here on amd64. Feel free to package Harmony, but I don't see how that will solve your problems, given it doesn't yet have a complete implementation of even 1.5.
> - robert > >
-- Andrew :-) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 ( Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-java] OpenJDK, IcedTea and Package Naming Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldonkin@×××××.com>