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/