From owner-freebsd-ports Sun May 7 8:30:58 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from ns.yogotech.com (ns.yogotech.com [206.127.123.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6B337B5B3; Sun, 7 May 2000 08:30:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nate@yogotech.com) Received: from nomad.yogotech.com (nomad.yogotech.com [206.127.123.131]) by ns.yogotech.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15562; Sun, 7 May 2000 09:30:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate@nomad.yogotech.com) Received: (from nate@localhost) by nomad.yogotech.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA22157; Sun, 7 May 2000 09:30:49 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from nate) Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 09:30:49 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200005071530.JAA22157@nomad.yogotech.com> From: Nate Williams MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: Nate Williams , java@freebsd.org, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Java run-time only port In-Reply-To: <39150AE5.5E30CA0@altavista.net> References: <3913D553.3FB9784@altavista.net> <200005061514.JAA17519@nomad.yogotech.com> <39150AE5.5E30CA0@altavista.net> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: nate@yogotech.com (Nate Williams) Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > Does anyone considering to make a stripped down version of the JDK > > > port to provide only components necessary to run Java applications? > > > > The WWW page used to have a pointer to the JRE, but a port was never > > made out of it. It's still on the ftp sites, although I'm not sure if > > the WWW site still has a pointer to it. > > Thanks for pointing, I'll check it out. > > > In order to be 'legal', the JRE provided must contain all of the sources > > as distributed, although you might get away from stripping the non-X > > stuff from the JRE if the program you're running is a GUI version, or > > stripping the X stuff if it's a non-GUI version. > > Interesting point. But does it apply to the case when JDK distributed in > full but user have an option to install only part of it (or delete unneeded > parts straight after installation)? Yes, it applies. > For example: whether my current stripped down JDK should be threaten > as 'illegal'? It would be rather illogical if so. It's illegal because it contains some classes (the most obvious one being the compiler classes) that are not legal to distribute as part of the product. I'm not defending Sun's action, just telling you what they consider to be legal to distribute as part of the product, and your stripped down version is not legal. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message