From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-144518-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9734F1384EE
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:47:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E4FE421C12B;
	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:47:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3942E21C003
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:47:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B3333DA86
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:47:09 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.119
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.119 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5
	tests=[AWL=-0.116, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001,
	SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1])
	by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id l5bxt7XCKRgO for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>;
	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:47:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0210633D96A
	for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 20:47:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-user@m.gmane.org>)
	id 1TvZt8-0003yH-3D
	for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:47:10 +0100
Received: from rej2.kyla.fi ([82.130.49.146])
        by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:47:10 +0100
Received: from nunojsilva by rej2.kyla.fi with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
        id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
        for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 21:47:10 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
From: nunojsilva@ist.utl.pt (Nuno J. Silva)
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: java vs icedtea6
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:46:44 +0200
Message-ID: <87wqvcrh3f.fsf@ist.utl.pt>
References: <50F5F525.4020107@iinet.net.au> <50F63453.9040602@gmail.com>
	<50F63B88.9060007@nileshgr.com> <50F65A0F.3010501@gmx.com>
	<CA+czFiA7Gohuv8yiLZv2Y3b4apDsXbSW9-5sSn96V-HhVutu4Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGK8UzBXCPxmJkS3BZW-MojuErmeHvcQ+AY74GFPUZY_teZAnw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: rej2.kyla.fi
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fRVbNLE5sqkFIndMsmMoCSf7gEQ=
X-Archives-Salt: ea148b5c-0bfa-43d7-b84e-420aa5b8f70e
X-Archives-Hash: eaba201cc8bc5119a0169e3be0a464ed

On 2013-01-16, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> Afair icedtea, openjdk, jdk share a Lot of Code.

Isn't IcedTea OpenJDK, or at least the name of the bundle OpenJDK +
build system?

> Am 16.01.2013 15:18 schrieb "Michael Mol" <mikemol@gmail.com>:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:43 AM, Daniel Campbell <dlcampbell@gmx.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On 01/15/2013 11:32 PM, Nilesh Govindrajan wrote:
>> >> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 10:32:11 AM IST, Kevin Brandstatter wrote:
>> >>> I'm curious as well about the potential exploitability of icedtea. I
>> >>> would think that since the icedtea vm is not the same as the sun/oracle
>> >>> one and so I don't think the code base is the same, which would mean an
>> >>> exploit in the sun/oracle jvm would not necessarily affect icedtea.
>> >>> However, I know very little on this matter and seeing as i think both
>> >>> are open sourced i have no idea how much or if there is any code> overlap.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Oracle Java is open source?
>> >>
>> >
>> > I was thinking the same thing. Last I knew, the VM is closed while the
>> > language is pretty much open.
>>
>> IIRC, the VM spec is open, the implementation isn't. Further, the
>> supporting libraries are open (as in you can see them). The biggest
>> 'closed' aspect is the pricey (and terms-restricting) certification
>> process to get a different implementation certified.
>>
>> But I might be woefully out of date.

-- 
Nuno Silva (aka njsg)
http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/