Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Peter B. West]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2511 bytes --]

Greg Tassone wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 13:50 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
> 
>>Greg Tassone wrote:
>>
>>>FYI:  There is nothing "unstable" about JDK 1.5 (or Java 5).
> 
> ...
> 
>> It has simply
>>
>>>been package-masked here at Gentoo because there have been some
>>>lingering ebuilds that didn't compile cleanly with it.  Hopefully it is
>>>going to be unmasked VERY soon.
>>>
>>
>>It also by default produces class files that are not compatible with
>>earlier versions etc.
> 
> ...
> 
>>You can safely make 1.5 the user vm using java-config -s. But just be
>>sure you don't ever set it as the system vm.
> 
> 
> Very true.  Just to clear up any confusion for others on the list, this
> means that if you are trying to run a 1.5 JDK as the primary on your
> system at the same time you have a 1.4 JDK running, the 1.4 JDK will be
> unable to use most of the code compiled from the 1.5 JDK (by default).
> 
> Since most packages on the Gentoo distro compile themselves from source
> (Java included), having a 1.5 JDK as your *system VM* means that your
> Java applications would be compiled so that ONLY Java 5 (and higher)
> runtimes could use the applications.  This is a show-stopper for those
> still running a 1.4 JDK (at least for non-developers, who should know
> how to deal with this stuff anyway):
> 
> Choices:
> 
>       * Run only 1.5 or higher on your system (with no intention of ever
>         going back down).  Note that as of a while ago certain packages
>         in the Portage tree still required 1.4, so this approach may
>         preclude installing those packages from Portage.
>  --OR--
>       * Take Petteri's advice and leave 1.4 as the system VM, and set
>         your "user" VM to 1.5 (or higher) if desired.
> 
> HTH to clarify...
> 
> Greg

So who wants to run a 1.4 JDK?  And what, exactly, prevents anything
from being compiled under 1.5?  The only thing I can think of is the
user of the newly reserved word 'enum'.  Big deal.  How long has 1.5
been around now?

My perception is that there is only an ideological impediment to going
with 1.5.  That is that it will be a long time before the
Stallman-approved JVMs support 1.5.  So, the Java herd on Gentoo Stalls
the adoption of 1.5, just to "prove" that 1) you don't need it, and 2)
it's a very bad thing.  Or at least it will be until the "free as in
slaves to ideology" crowd get their act together.  Thanks for nothing.

Peter
-- 
Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/>
Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Antony Riley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3798 bytes --]

There's a whole bunch of subtleties.

Just unmerge all your java packages, and try to re-emerge them with a
1.5system JVM.

New keywords.
Some packages build scripts use -source 1.1 -source 1.1 which the 1.5 javac
doesn't seem to support anymore. [goes as low as 1.2 now]

I'm sure there's more.

The "not backwards compatable to 1.5" is a bit of an error as many packages
seem to specify -source and -target in their build scripts.

I couldn't even get ant to build, which is fairly important for most java
packages.

I was thinking if you just patched ant to default the <javac> task to
-source 1.4 -target 1.5, you could probably get a mostly working system, but
the packages which set these explicitely would still be a problem, also it
may be a problem with 1.5 only packages that don't specify these [unless you
want to go around patching lots of build scripts]

I haven't looked at the experiement java stuff yet, might take a gander
sometime, so appologies if I'm saying stuff that's already been said.

On 11/29/05, Peter B. West <lists@pbw.id.au> wrote:
>
> Greg Tassone wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 13:50 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
> >
> >>Greg Tassone wrote:
> >>
> >>>FYI:  There is nothing "unstable" about JDK 1.5 (or Java 5).
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> It has simply
> >>
> >>>been package-masked here at Gentoo because there have been some
> >>>lingering ebuilds that didn't compile cleanly with it.  Hopefully it is
> >>>going to be unmasked VERY soon.
> >>>
> >>
> >>It also by default produces class files that are not compatible with
> >>earlier versions etc.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >>You can safely make 1.5 the user vm using java-config -s. But just be
> >>sure you don't ever set it as the system vm.
> >
> >
> > Very true.  Just to clear up any confusion for others on the list, this
> > means that if you are trying to run a 1.5 JDK as the primary on your
> > system at the same time you have a 1.4 JDK running, the 1.4 JDK will be
> > unable to use most of the code compiled from the 1.5 JDK (by default).
> >
> > Since most packages on the Gentoo distro compile themselves from source
> > (Java included), having a 1.5 JDK as your *system VM* means that your
> > Java applications would be compiled so that ONLY Java 5 (and higher)
> > runtimes could use the applications.  This is a show-stopper for those
> > still running a 1.4 JDK (at least for non-developers, who should know
> > how to deal with this stuff anyway):
> >
> > Choices:
> >
> >       * Run only 1.5 or higher on your system (with no intention of ever
> >         going back down).  Note that as of a while ago certain packages
> >         in the Portage tree still required 1.4, so this approach may
> >         preclude installing those packages from Portage.
> >  --OR--
> >       * Take Petteri's advice and leave 1.4 as the system VM, and set
> >         your "user" VM to 1.5 (or higher) if desired.
> >
> > HTH to clarify...
> >
> > Greg
>
> So who wants to run a 1.4 JDK?  And what, exactly, prevents anything
> from being compiled under 1.5?  The only thing I can think of is the
> user of the newly reserved word 'enum'.  Big deal.  How long has 1.5
> been around now?
>
> My perception is that there is only an ideological impediment to going
> with 1.5.  That is that it will be a long time before the
> Stallman-approved JVMs support 1.5.  So, the Java herd on Gentoo Stalls
> the adoption of 1.5, just to "prove" that 1) you don't need it, and 2)
> it's a very bad thing.  Or at least it will be until the "free as in
> slaves to ideology" crowd get their act together.  Thanks for nothing.
>
> Peter
> --
> Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/>
> Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4877 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Joshua Nichols]

> So who wants to run a 1.4 JDK?  And what, exactly, prevents anything
> from being compiled under 1.5?  The only thing I can think of is the
> user of the newly reserved word 'enum'.  Big deal.  How long has 1.5
> been around now?
Have you actually tried using a 1.5 JDK to emerge your system? I'm
guessing not, because xerces, xalan, and dom4j won't compile with 1.5,
and they are pretty critical XML libraries that lots of things use.

Actually, there are a number of incompatibilities:
http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/compatibility.html#incompatibilities


> My perception is that there is only an ideological impediment to going
> with 1.5.  That is that it will be a long time before the
> Stallman-approved JVMs support 1.5.  So, the Java herd on Gentoo Stalls
> the adoption of 1.5, just to "prove" that 1) you don't need it, and 2)
> it's a very bad thing.  Or at least it will be until the "free as in
> slaves to ideology" crowd get their act together.  Thanks for nothing.

Somehow, I must have missed the conspiracy memo.... Seriously though,
where the heck did this come from?

I think you're seriously overestimating the manpower working on Java
support for Gentoo. There are now 10 developers (I'm a recent addition),
with 3 currently on leave. Of those 7, most of them have some sort of
life outside of Gentoo. With some 300+ packages to maintain with some
200 outstanding bugs, there isn't a lot of time/effort remaining for new
and exciting stuff.

Plus, it's not like there hasn't been work towards 1.5 support. See the
1.5 metabug: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65937
Additionally, Thomas (axxo) has been working on an overlay for the past
six months or so to support 1.5, as was previously announced
(http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.java/605). He must not have
gotten the memo either.




So how can one help with supporting 1.5? Testing and provididing
feedback on axxo-overlay would be the most useful. There are some
details on http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/java/ but I hope to add more
details sometime this evening.

Regards,
Josh

-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Peter B. West]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3264 bytes --]

Joshua Nichols wrote:
>>So who wants to run a 1.4 JDK?  And what, exactly, prevents anything
>>from being compiled under 1.5?  The only thing I can think of is the
>>user of the newly reserved word 'enum'.  Big deal.  How long has 1.5
>>been around now?
> 
> Have you actually tried using a 1.5 JDK to emerge your system? I'm
> guessing not, because xerces, xalan, and dom4j won't compile with 1.5,
> and they are pretty critical XML libraries that lots of things use.
> 

See my response to the "ant won't compile" message.  Same story, at 
least partially.

Download sources for Xerces-J. Read README, which tells me I need the 
tools.  Download the tools.  Extract "in the same directory."  What does 
that mean? Read build.sh. Ah, tools is in the Xerces directory. Do that. 
  Run sh build.sh jars. Result:

BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 13 seconds

Do I really have to do this with Xalan as well?  Java 5 ships with 
xerces as its parser, in place of crimson. That's in the incompatibility 
notes. It ships with xalan, and defaults to using xsltc. Also in the 
incompatibility notes.  (And xalan 2.7.0 has one reported bug that I 
know of that causes problems with netbeans 5.0).

The simple fact is that I can pick up any of the binaries and they will 
almost certainly run without problems.  There are a handful of obscure 
binary-level incompatibilities, but the only problem I have encountered 
is the netbeans bug I mentioned; not an incompatibility.

Peter

> Actually, there are a number of incompatibilities:
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/compatibility.html#incompatibilities
> 
> 
> 
>>My perception is that there is only an ideological impediment to going
>>with 1.5.  That is that it will be a long time before the
>>Stallman-approved JVMs support 1.5.  So, the Java herd on Gentoo Stalls
>>the adoption of 1.5, just to "prove" that 1) you don't need it, and 2)
>>it's a very bad thing.  Or at least it will be until the "free as in
>>slaves to ideology" crowd get their act together.  Thanks for nothing.
> 
> 
> Somehow, I must have missed the conspiracy memo.... Seriously though,
> where the heck did this come from?
> 
> I think you're seriously overestimating the manpower working on Java
> support for Gentoo. There are now 10 developers (I'm a recent addition),
> with 3 currently on leave. Of those 7, most of them have some sort of
> life outside of Gentoo. With some 300+ packages to maintain with some
> 200 outstanding bugs, there isn't a lot of time/effort remaining for new
> and exciting stuff.
> 
> Plus, it's not like there hasn't been work towards 1.5 support. See the
> 1.5 metabug: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65937
> Additionally, Thomas (axxo) has been working on an overlay for the past
> six months or so to support 1.5, as was previously announced
> (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.java/605). He must not have
> gotten the memo either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So how can one help with supporting 1.5? Testing and provididing
> feedback on axxo-overlay would be the most useful. There are some
> details on http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/java/ but I hope to add more
> details sometime this evening.
> 
> Regards,
> Josh


-- 
Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/>
Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Greg Tassone]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2231 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 22:39 +0000, Peter B. West wrote:
> Joshua Nichols wrote:
> >>So who wants to run a 1.4 JDK?  And what, exactly, prevents anything
> >>from being compiled under 1.5?  The only thing I can think of is the
> >>user of the newly reserved word 'enum'.  Big deal.  How long has 1.5
> >>been around now?
> > 
> > Have you actually tried using a 1.5 JDK to emerge your system? I'm
> > guessing not, because xerces, xalan, and dom4j won't compile with 1.5,
> > and they are pretty critical XML libraries that lots of things use.
> > 
> 
> See my response to the "ant won't compile" message.  Same story, at 
> least partially.
> 
> Download sources for Xerces-J. Read README, which tells me I need the 
> tools.  Download the tools.  Extract "in the same directory."  What does 
> that mean? Read build.sh. Ah, tools is in the Xerces directory. Do that. 
>   Run sh build.sh jars. Result:
> 
> BUILD SUCCESSFUL
> Total time: 13 seconds
> 
> Do I really have to do this with Xalan as well?  Java 5 ships with 
> xerces as its parser, in place of crimson. That's in the incompatibility 
> notes. It ships with xalan, and defaults to using xsltc. Also in the 
> incompatibility notes.  (And xalan 2.7.0 has one reported bug that I 
> know of that causes problems with netbeans 5.0).
> 
> The simple fact is that I can pick up any of the binaries and they will 
> almost certainly run without problems.  There are a handful of obscure 
> binary-level incompatibilities, but the only problem I have encountered 
> is the netbeans bug I mentioned; not an incompatibility.
> 
> Peter


I think you're missing one of the main points here... he did NOT say
that they would not compile at all -- he said they would not compile on
the current Gentoo ebuild base (e.g., "... using a 1.5 JDK to emerge
your system").

Then, did you see the rest of his message, the part talking about the
1.5 overlay that is being worked on?  The main point of the overlay is
to get these "incompatibilities" resolved.  Then the "fixed" ebuilds
from the overlay can become mainstream in Portage.

This stuff takes time, especially when system-level stability issues
stand in the balance.

Greg


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Peter B. West]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3948 bytes --]

Greg Tassone wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 22:39 +0000, Peter B. West wrote:
> 
>>Joshua Nichols wrote:
>>
>>>>So who wants to run a 1.4 JDK?  And what, exactly, prevents anything
>>>
>>>>from being compiled under 1.5?  The only thing I can think of is the
>>>
>>>>user of the newly reserved word 'enum'.  Big deal.  How long has 1.5
>>>>been around now?
>>>
>>>Have you actually tried using a 1.5 JDK to emerge your system? I'm
>>>guessing not, because xerces, xalan, and dom4j won't compile with 1.5,
>>>and they are pretty critical XML libraries that lots of things use.
>>>
>>
>>See my response to the "ant won't compile" message.  Same story, at 
>>least partially.
>>
>>Download sources for Xerces-J. Read README, which tells me I need the 
>>tools.  Download the tools.  Extract "in the same directory."  What does 
>>that mean? Read build.sh. Ah, tools is in the Xerces directory. Do that. 
>>  Run sh build.sh jars. Result:
>>
>>BUILD SUCCESSFUL
>>Total time: 13 seconds
>>
>>Do I really have to do this with Xalan as well?  Java 5 ships with 
>>xerces as its parser, in place of crimson. That's in the incompatibility 
>>notes. It ships with xalan, and defaults to using xsltc. Also in the 
>>incompatibility notes.  (And xalan 2.7.0 has one reported bug that I 
>>know of that causes problems with netbeans 5.0).
>>
>>The simple fact is that I can pick up any of the binaries and they will 
>>almost certainly run without problems.  There are a handful of obscure 
>>binary-level incompatibilities, but the only problem I have encountered 
>>is the netbeans bug I mentioned; not an incompatibility.
>>
>>Peter
> 
> 
> 
> I think you're missing one of the main points here... he did NOT say
> that they would not compile at all -- he said they would not compile on
> the current Gentoo ebuild base (e.g., "... using a 1.5 JDK to emerge
> your system").
> 
> Then, did you see the rest of his message, the part talking about the
> 1.5 overlay that is being worked on?  The main point of the overlay is
> to get these "incompatibilities" resolved.  Then the "fixed" ebuilds
> from the overlay can become mainstream in Portage.
> 
> This stuff takes time, especially when system-level stability issues
> stand in the balance.

I think you're missing my point.  Java 5 works, and is, for practical 
purposes, forward compatible with 1,4, with the exception of 'enum'.  If 
that is so, why not a flag 'java5', that triggers source source 1.4 on 
packages that need it?  The system JVM is 5, and Bob's your uncle. 
What's the system-level stability issue?

This is not a technical issue, it's an ideological issue, as I said 
before.  This is, in fact, quite explicit in the Gentoo documentation. I 
suggest that subscribers to the "conspiracy-theory-theory" (I never used 
the word) read the "Gentoo social contract"
<http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml>, including the definition 
of "free software" <http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html>.

I suggest, further, that the Gentoo folks in this forum come clean about 
this when asked in good faith about using Java 5 on Gentoo.  The answer 
is along these lines: Java 5 will not be supported on Gentoo until a 1.5 
JVM is available under a Stallman-approved licence.  The genuine options 
for J5 users are to scrap the Gentoo Java support and maintain your own 
Java environment, or to abandon Gentoo.

I see that there is yet another enquiry on the list about using J5. Do 
that user a favour and tell him why he can't get a supported J5 
environment on Gentoo, so that he can then make informed decisions. If 
you guys are embarrassed by the Gentoo ideology, change it or leave. If 
not, present it honestly, instead of spouting this deliberately 
misleading BS about system stability issues.  It's leaving users with 
the impression that J5 is unstable, which it patently is not.

Peter
-- 
Peter B. West <http://cv.pbw.id.au/>
Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2053 bytes --]

Peter B. West wrote:
> 
> 
> I think you're missing my point.  Java 5 works, and is, for practical
> purposes, forward compatible with 1,4, with the exception of 'enum'.  If
> that is so, why not a flag 'java5', that triggers source source 1.4 on
> packages that need it?  The system JVM is 5, and Bob's your uncle.
> What's the system-level stability issue?
> 

Java 5 is *not* API compatible with 1.4.

We already have an overlay for using 1.5:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~betelgeuse/axxo-overlay

As far as stability goes, I think 1.5 is more stable than 1.4 as far as
for example applets go.

>
> This is not a technical issue, it's an ideological issue, as I said
> before.  This is, in fact, quite explicit in the Gentoo documentation. I
> suggest that subscribers to the "conspiracy-theory-theory" (I never used
> the word) read the "Gentoo social contract"
> <http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml>, including the definition
> of "free software" <http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html>.
> 
> I suggest, further, that the Gentoo folks in this forum come clean about
> this when asked in good faith about using Java 5 on Gentoo.  The answer
> is along these lines: Java 5 will not be supported on Gentoo until a 1.5
> JVM is available under a Stallman-approved licence.  The genuine options
> for J5 users are to scrap the Gentoo Java support and maintain your own
> Java environment, or to abandon Gentoo.
> 
> I see that there is yet another enquiry on the list about using J5. Do
> that user a favour and tell him why he can't get a supported J5
> environment on Gentoo, so that he can then make informed decisions. If
> you guys are embarrassed by the Gentoo ideology, change it or leave. If
> not, present it honestly, instead of spouting this deliberately
> misleading BS about system stability issues.  It's leaving users with
> the impression that J5 is unstable, which it patently is not.
> 
> Peter

We already have a Java 5 environment for which you will get support from
us: It is called the axxo-overlay.

Regards,
Petteri

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Java 1.5 - the Real Story [was: Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10]

[Karl Trygve Kalleberg]

Peter B. West wrote:


I had hoped this discussion died down by itself, since it has no merit 
whatsoever. I guess for confuzzled readers, it's time I made something 
of an "official" statement on the 1.5 issue on behalf of the Java team.


> I think you're missing my point.  Java 5 works, and is, for practical 
> purposes, forward compatible with 1,4, with the exception of 'enum'.  If 
> that is so, why not a flag 'java5', that triggers source source 1.4 on 
> packages that need it?  The system JVM is 5, and Bob's your uncle. 
> What's the system-level stability issue?

This issue has been adressed multiple times before, so I won't go into 
why Java 1.5 is not a drop-in replacement to for 1.4 in the Gentoo 
package system.

> This is not a technical issue, it's an ideological issue, as I said 
> before.

It may be an ideological issue to you, but you are not on the Gentoo 
Java developer team. I am. I can speak for the Java developer team, and 
state once and for all that the only reason why Java 1.5 is not 
unmasked, is because of technical issues that we are still working on.


 > This is, in fact, quite explicit in the Gentoo documentation. I
> suggest that subscribers to the "conspiracy-theory-theory" (I never used 
> the word) read the "Gentoo social contract"
> <http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml>, including the definition 
> of "free software" <http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html>.
 >
> I suggest, further, that the Gentoo folks in this forum come clean about 
> this when asked in good faith about using Java 5 on Gentoo.  The answer 
> is along these lines: Java 5 will not be supported on Gentoo until a 1.5 
> JVM is available under a Stallman-approved licence.

Again, as the lead of the Java team, I'll simply state that this is 
untrue. I should think that we, the developers, have a good idea of our 
reasons for not putting it in yet. If you hear reasons not coming from 
us that differ from our stated opinions, it is safe to assume they are 
invalid.

 > The genuine options for J5 users are to scrap the Gentoo Java support and
 > maintain your own  Java environment, or to abandon Gentoo.

This is known as a "false dichotomy", and is usually used as a bogus 
rhetorical trick to incite flamewars. In reality, there are many more 
choices:

(3) Use the Axxo overlay
(4) Use the Java 1.5 JRE, but not the JDK
(5) Help us solve the remaining technical issues

I have a hard time seeing how you could have missed these three.

> I see that there is yet another enquiry on the list about using J5. Do 
> that user a favour and tell him why he can't get a supported J5 
> environment on Gentoo, so that he can then make informed decisions. If 
> you guys are embarrassed by the Gentoo ideology, change it or leave. If 
> not, present it honestly, instead of spouting this deliberately 
> misleading BS about system stability issues.  It's leaving users with 
> the impression that J5 is unstable, which it patently is not.


This is a comment worthy of debian-legal;P

Seriously, though, I'd like to reiterate: The problem comes down to 
manpower, not ideology.

Instead of spending your and my time on writing mails on this topic, 
please help us solve the technical issues. The Gentoo community, as any 
other open-source community, is dependent on help, input and 
constructive criticism from our users.


Cheers,

-- Karl T
-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: Java 1.5 - the Real Story [was: Re: [gentoo-java] Question about Sun-Jdk 1.4.2.10]

[John Manko]

> > The genuine options for J5 users are to scrap the Gentoo Java 
> support and
> > maintain your own  Java environment, or to abandon Gentoo.
>
> (5) Help us solve the remaining technical issues
>
>> I see that there is yet another enquiry on the list about using J5. 
>> Do that user a favour and tell him why he can't get a supported J5 
>> environment on Gentoo, so that he can then make informed decisions. 
>> If you guys are embarrassed by the Gentoo ideology, change it or 
>> leave. If not, present it honestly, instead of spouting this 
>> deliberately misleading BS about system stability issues.  It's 
>> leaving users with the impression that J5 is unstable, which it 
>> patently is not.
>
> Instead of spending your and my time on writing mails on this topic, 
> please help us solve the technical issues. The Gentoo community, as 
> any other open-source community, is dependent on help, input and 
> constructive criticism from our users.
>

I'd love to help.

-- 
gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list