Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:58:52 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why diablo-jdk? Message-ID: <h6cjqv$88v$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <20090813162022.GA86679@keira.kiwi-computer.com> References: <200908131302.06949.malcolm.kay@internode.on.net> <1250149102.63923.1169.camel@predator-ii.buffyverse> <20090813162022.GA86679@keira.kiwi-computer.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Rick C. Petty wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 05:08:22PM +0930, Wayne Sierke wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 13:02 +0930, Malcolm Kay wrote: >>> It seems that many (if not most) posts to this list concern the >>> Diablo version of jdk. >>> >>> Is there some particular merit in using this in preference to the >>> regular FreeBSD port -- say jdk16? >>> >>> Your comment is welcome, >>> Malcolm >> I've been meaning to pose a related question. >> >> Why is it that in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.java.Mk java/diablo-jdk15 is >> preferred over java/jdk16? In fact the order of preference seems to be: >> diablo-jdk16, diablo-jdk15, openjdk6 then jdk16 ... > > I believe it's because building the non-diablo JDKs takes a significant > amount of time and drive space. Most people don't want the hassle of > compiling a JDK, especially since you need to bootstrap it with another > JDK. It's a classic chicken and egg problem. I think this way satisfies > more people. Isn't there also something about diablo being put through Sun's implementation/regression tests to be able to be distributed by the Foundation? [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkqJ0pwACgkQldnAQVacBcikowCfWswY2dfaLMI0ynHP8WLAzIjs JEAAn1LreoakDcrmAJkru5IkybRmEmOx =xTAN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?h6cjqv$88v$1>