From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 31 20:16:19 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0681065674 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:16:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.11]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBCB08FC16 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:16:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from roberthuff@rcn.com) Received: from 209-6-22-188.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO jerusalem.litteratus.org.litteratus.org) ([209.6.22.188]) by smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 31 Mar 2008 17:07:11 -0400 From: Robert Huff MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18417.17323.160703.979205@jerusalem.litteratus.org> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:03:55 -0400 To: "Aryeh M. Friedman" In-Reply-To: <47F14074.2080801@gmail.com> References: <56c204c90803310233o1bfa8a6fgf7db91841ae02ca9@mail.gmail.com> <47F0BC09.5090203@gmail.com> <20080331191048.GB18553@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <47F14074.2080801@gmail.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" XEmacs Lucid Cc: Aliaksandr Voitau , freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Obsolete jdk15, jdk16, linux-sun-jdk15, linux-sun-jdk16 X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:16:19 -0000 Aryeh M. Friedman writes: > >>> Are there any plans to update jdk ports in accordance with > >>> recently updated versions (1.5.0_15, 1.6.0_05)? (since all > >>> previous are already not available for download officially) > >>> > >> A side note diablo also needs to be rebuilt to get rid of kse references. > > > > Very unlikely to happen unless someone wants to fund this. You can't just > > rebuild it, you've got to rebuild it and then run it through the JCK tests > > again. Time is much more likely to be invested in getting a Diablo release > > for 1.6 done rather than updating the 1.5 release unless someone is paid > > to do it. > > Valid SoC project? If so I will make an application for it. (I > already applied for ports 2.0 but will make this my alt) As I understand things, the obstacle is not "rebuild it" but "run it through the JCK tests again". The latter takes time, it takes (five digits ?? of) money, and it takes one or more Official People babysitting the process. Diablo-1.5 happened in part because a third party thought it worth their effort to fund the effort. Given a viable successor is already in the field, it would seem to ake sense for them to fund that ... if they fund anything at all. Robert Huff