Gary Benson (Red Hat) has made available Jonas in the Fedora Java development list (screenshot). Along with the large number of free and open source Java packages made available in Fedora Core 4 already, more are being added to rawhide compiled with GCJ. These include Lucene, additional Jakarta components, and more. You can read the rawhide reports in Fedora
Test to track the rolling development updates.
Jonas, Jakarta, Lucene????
See ucedac, there are these things on a web page called links. You might have heard of them
If java is slow, GCJ compiled java code is ridiculous. All benchmarks I’ve seen always show GCJ speed as the slowest by a great deal, almost as a reference for the slowest you can get, even on number crunching benchmarks. I think Fedora is on the right path providing java packages and GCJ is ok to provide OpenOffice 2.0 without removing Base, but nobody will use Tomcat or any jakarta code without a proper JVM.
I am developing a java project using eclipse on windows. I would like to develop it on linux, the problem is I started the project relaying strongly on java tiger language features like templates, autoboxing and enums. As far as I know, these features are not yet integrated into gcj. I guess I will have to wait for gcjx and/or the classpath template branch to be integrated.
You don’t have to wait. Grab any JVM for linux and you are set. If you can do it on windows you can do it on linux. I do develop on linux with the new languaje features. If you want to use gcj, then you can’t use those features on windows either.
Yes, I know I can take the Sun JDK for linux and keep developing my project with 1.5 features right away. But my intention is to use gcj and native eclipse, just to try them and see how it feels. After all my project is a free-time deal to me. Anyway, thanks for the advice.
You might be interested in this
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-java-list/2005-June/msg…
If java is slow, GCJ compiled java code is ridiculous. All benchmarks I’ve seen always show GCJ speed as the slowest by a great deal, almost as a reference for the slowest you can get, even on number crunching benchmarks. I think Fedora is on the right path providing java packages and GCJ is ok to provide OpenOffice 2.0 without removing Base, but nobody will use Tomcat or any jakarta code without a proper JVM.
Uh-huh, and now would you make a constructive criticism? Because your whining didn’t help much, sorry. And BTW, there are times when GCJ-compiled code is actually faster than Sun’s JVM; for example:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Brion_VIBBER/MWDaemon
Victor.
You say your project uses the new features heavily so developing it using eclipse under gcj is nosesense when you can’t run it with gcj. You can run eclipse with gcj on linux.
Uh-huh, and now would you make a constructive criticism?
Here it is: measure the cost/benefit of porting some tool everybody uses with a real JVM to gcj. TFA says the tool he ported hangs, does not stop, has bugs and needs testing. This does not make sense to neither a production site nor an amateur user since everybody using java programs downloads some JVM (i think more than 3 flavours available in linux).
It may be useful to the gcj or classpath guys, but not the majority of users.
Why run a tool you really need in a way that will make it have more bugs, be slower and less flexible?
Red Hat are following through with their vision for Java. It’ll take some time, but they’ll get there I think.
GCJ is going to take time to get up to scratch, and it also depends on where Harmony fits into the whole infrastructure when it eventually gets up and running. Now Red Hat’s position over Mono is clear. Mono simply does not fit into their Java-oriented strategy, and considering that the J2EE web application server business in particular is a significant market (unlike ASP.Net on Linux/Unix, or ASP.Net period) who can blame them? To fit in with this they want their Java development strategy done from desktop to server. Red Hat have a business to run based on a solid market, not an ideology.
Jonas, Jakarta, Lucene????
http://jonas.objectweb.org/
Jonas is an open source (LGPL) J2EE implementation, based either on Tomcat or Jetty. It was started by Bull but has lots of other companies and individuals involved in a community. Unlike JBoss, it has a much more equal feel to it for many people rather than just being controlled by one company. Jonas is the J2EE implementation that Red Hat will be using in all of their server software.
As for Jakarta and Lucene – look around the Apache site.
This is a really smart move. Mono is dangerous legally but up until now there hasn’t been anyone really stepping forward to provide a good mono alternative. Red Hat should expand this effort to take mono head on by improving the gnome desktop support for java and creating better ide (at least by improving eclipse/java/gnome/glade integration) for doing desktop development in gnome.
Mono is dangerous legally but up until now there hasn’t been anyone really stepping forward to provide a good mono alternative.
Well, Red Hat may, rightly, be quite wary of any legal implications of Mono (and there may be many other reasons) but that’s not their primary motivation. On non-Windows applications, within the application server space they want to get into, the business world is Java. Their direction on Java is first and foremost a business decision.
I know I can run eclipse natively with gcj on linux, but can I compile with gcj a source code that contains templates, enums and autoboxing heavily? As far as I know, gcj/classpath is not there yet for it. That is what I want, that is what I meant.
> but can I compile with gcj a source code that contains templates,
I think it’s specifically called “generics” to differentiate itself from “templates” (what C++ has).
Dunno about J2SE 1.5 compatibility though. You might have a look at the ML archives http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/ and do quick search there.
Java 1.5 stuff is in development since fall 2004 in GNU Classpath (no immediate plans for gcj I am aware of). One can use Eclipse’s ECJ to compile Classpath’s generics branch. Later this year Tom Tromey’s new GCC frontend GCJX might be able to do the same (including our beloved compile-to-native feature).
Implementing Java 5 stuff in Classpath is a huge but not endlessly difficult task (add correct generic signatures everywhere).
Join us (GNU Classpath) and help with the effort and there will be a free Java5-like system even earlier.
Robert Schuster
for GNU Classpath