You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> on 2000/03/19 00:20:55 UTC
JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>
> On 17/3/00 at 2:40 pm, stefano@apache.org (Stefano Mazzocchi) wrote:
>
> >On second thought, this is JDK 1.2 so can't use it for Cocoon 1.x
> >
> >But it's a good suggestion anyway... we'll use it for Cocoon2 that will
> >be JDK 1.2 based.
>
> Gulp!
>
> Are you saying Cocoon 2 will only run under Java 1.2?
> I hope not, there is no Java 1.2 for several platforms ....
Win95/98/NT/2000 - yes
Solaris - yes
Linux - yes
FreeBSD - yes (via linux emulation)
AIX/AS400 - rumors that IBM JDK 1.2 was put on hold to put political
pressure on Sun but it's ready to be shipped... may happen any day.
So, what are we missing... oh yeah
Beos
QNX
IRIX
and last but not least MacOS
What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
people with the ability to have basic functionality?
Comments appreciated.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@localbar.com>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > Are you saying Cocoon 2 will only run under Java 1.2?
>
> Win95/98/NT/2000 - yes
> Solaris - yes
> Linux - yes
> FreeBSD - yes (via linux emulation)
> AIX/AS400 - rumors that IBM JDK 1.2 was put on hold to put political
> pressure on Sun but it's ready to be shipped... may happen any day.
>
> So, what are we missing... oh yeah
>
> Beos
> QNX
> IRIX
> and last but not least MacOS
It is more than 1 year since the reference implementation of Java 2 was
released. In fact, the Java Technology Compaitibility Agreement clearly
states that the licensee must release a new version within 6 months from that
date. So, who is at fault in each case? Are we to expect any 1.2 on these
systems at all?? Considering that 1.3 is just being rolled out of the door.
Another aspect, what are the requirements for Xerces and Xalan?? Still
1.1? If they require 1.2, then I say there is no need to debate any further.
+1 for 1.2
Niclas
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Sebastien Sahuc <ss...@imediation.com>.
> > What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
> > the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still
> leaving
> > people with the ability to have basic functionality?
> >
> > Comments appreciated.
Having a full range of OSes supporting Java 1.2.x is one thing. But as
Cocoon mainly resides behind a Servlet engine, the concern is more on
the servlet engine side than on the OS side. FYI the last version of
Websphere 3.0 only work on 1.1.8, and IBM has no short plan (before
the end of the year) in supporting the 1.2.2. I don't know for the
other Servlet engine, but it's definitely something cocoon should be
aware of IMHO.
Sebastien
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> Lucky I put in the reservation... I am not a GUI guy, and will never be, so
> I don't track this too closely. However, I have server-side rendering of charts
> into GIFs and JPGs which require X to be running, and that's when I dug up the
> 'promised' BufferedImage class not requiring the X server.
Hehehehe :) That was the class that made me change VM last year :)
> > Are you using JDK-1.2??? :)
>
> Yes, for the last year and a bit. The Linux jump was made in August, and have been
> pretty happy with all of it.
Soooo... Let's shoot Cocoon 2 in JDK 1.2
> > Or just install the xvfb server... It works perfectly and it has
> > basically ZERO overhead...
>
> Took a while to find that one. But, yes it is a breeze...
Hehehe :)
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@localbar.com>.
Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
> > But rendering of images should be over java.awt.image.BufferedImage, which is
> > JDK 1.0 (according to API docs.)
>
> And the API docs are wrong... Since:
Lucky I put in the reservation... I am not a GUI guy, and will never be, so
I don't track this too closely. However, I have server-side rendering of charts
into GIFs and JPGs which require X to be running, and that's when I dug up the
'promised' BufferedImage class not requiring the X server.
> Are you using JDK-1.2??? :)
Yes, for the last year and a bit. The Linux jump was made in August, and have been
pretty happy with all of it.
> Or just install the xvfb server... It works perfectly and it has
> basically ZERO overhead...
Took a while to find that one. But, yes it is a breeze...
Niclas
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
>
> > Ross Burton wrote:
> > > * Swing (not relevant)
> >
> > Very relevant since Cocoon can produce images out of XMLs (like SVG
> > rendering). It's true, it's not "core" but it's one of the features we
> > cannot avoid to have.
>
> But rendering of images should be over java.awt.image.BufferedImage, which is
> JDK 1.0 (according to API docs.)
And the API docs are wrong... Since:
C:\>dir \jdk-1.1.8\src\BufferedImage*.* /s
Volume in drive C has no label.
Volume Serial Number is E0F8-939F
File Not Found
BufferedImage was introduced in JDK-1.2 (according to my JDKs)
Are you using JDK-1.2??? :)
> Because Sun has promised that "somewhere in the future" BufferedImage
> will not require X Windows to be running, which is now the case on Linux.
Or just install the xvfb server... It works perfectly and it has
basically ZERO overhead...
> This is rather important, since Cocoon will very often sit on servers,
> which typically doesn't have X started.
xvfb is the way to go now, but I don't know if they'll ever publish the
null JDK AWT. I know they have an implementation, but I'm not sure about
their plans (and I could care less at this time, XVFB runs great...)
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@localbar.com>.
Pierpaolo Fumagalli wrote:
> Ross Burton wrote:
> > * Swing (not relevant)
>
> Very relevant since Cocoon can produce images out of XMLs (like SVG
> rendering). It's true, it's not "core" but it's one of the features we
> cannot avoid to have.
But rendering of images should be over java.awt.image.BufferedImage, which is
JDK 1.0 (according to API docs.)
Because Sun has promised that "somewhere in the future" BufferedImage will not
require X Windows to be running, which is now the case on Linux. This is rather
important, since Cocoon will very often sit on servers, which typically doesn't
have X started.
> > * Classloader extensions? I've heard this but are they useful? It seems
> > that the current problem with classloaders stems from bugs in JServ/Tomcat.
>
> They'll be useful when thinking about XML page compilation (XSP)... This
> is _CORE_ :)
Are we talking loading classes in and out of memory?? That is handled in JServ,
so 1.2 is not necessary.
Are we talking about the Extension classloader?? That is mostly for convinience.
Or are we really talking java.net.URLClassloader?? Which is cute, but not
entirely necessary for our needs.
> I believe that, since our first non-beta release is scheduled for
> october, we should try to focus on those environments that in october
> will have a reliable JDK-1.2 implementation...
> And IMVHO Linux will be one of those...
Although your arguments are weak, I strongly agree with you.
Collections are nice, but not mandatory to get the job done.
I would say that Weak References is THE strongest argument. Which will enable
far better caching algorithms among other things.
Perhaps some security classes will be worth mentioning as well, but it seems
that Cocoon wish to leave that outside its scope.
Niclas
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Ross Burton wrote:
>
> What are the actual advantages of 1.2.x opposed to 1.1.x?
>
> As far as I can see it:
> * Swing (not relevant)
Very relevant since Cocoon can produce images out of XMLs (like SVG
rendering). It's true, it's not "core" but it's one of the features we
cannot avoid to have.
> * Collections (appaling architecture, and if we really need powerful ADTs
> then use the JGL)
Collections are nice...
> * Classloader extensions? I've heard this but are they useful? It seems
> that the current problem with classloaders stems from bugs in JServ/Tomcat.
They'll be useful when thinking about XML page compilation (XSP)... This
is _CORE_ :)
> I like having the core system 1.1.x, and as many plugins 1.1.x too, but
> 1.2.x is they need to be.
>
> Really I shouldn't care as I use 1.2.2 for development, but we'll probably
> be using IBM's 1.1.8 for Linux for real use as it is sooo much faster.
I believe that, since our first non-beta release is scheduled for
october, we should try to focus on those environments that in october
will have a reliable JDK-1.2 implementation...
And IMVHO Linux will be one of those...
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Ross Burton wrote:
> > > Really I shouldn't care as I use 1.2.2 for development, but we'll
> probably
> > > be using IBM's 1.1.8 for Linux for real use as it is sooo much faster.
> > Ok, this all comes down to the real issue: performance.
> > I _KNOW_ that IBM JDK 1.2 for both win32 and linux (codename Colorado)
> > is ready to ship and faster than 1.1.8 on both platforms.
> > So, do you seriously believe that by October they would not release it?
>
> How is it faster? A better Hotspot, or just well written? C'mon man -
> spill the beans! :-)
Hey, I haven't plaied around with it... it's internal IBM rumors only.
> If Sun release Colorado by then, I'll be very happy.
IBM, not Sun.
> Then I'll probably be
> happy with 1.2 mainly, though I think it may be a good idea to implement
> MemoryStore for Cocoon 2 like it is now, terrible but (sort of) working
> 1.1.x code. Then, if need be,it can be plugged in.
Yeah, that would be a good solution: the core 1.1 compatible and move
the 1.2 specific stuff on components and provide 1.1 component that
mimic that functionality as close as possible.
who does it sound?
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Ross Burton <ro...@lineone.net>.
> > As far as I can see it:
> > * Swing (not relevant)
> Swing can be used in 1.1 also.
What package is Swing under now? When I last looked it was
com.sun.java.swing or something - is the download for 1.1 javax.swing yet?
> > * Collections (appaling architecture, and if we really need powerful
ADTs
> > then use the JGL)
> Collections can be used in 1.1 also.
> > * Classloader extensions? I've heard this but are they useful? It
seems
> > that the current problem with classloaders stems from bugs in
JServ/Tomcat.
> The problem could be worked around.
Good!
> > I like having the core system 1.1.x, and as many plugins 1.1.x too, but
> > 1.2.x is they need to be.
> There is only one place where we can't have 1.1: MemoryStore. I love the
> idea of weak references and I'm sure that we can get around some
> implementation limitations by fragmenting the memory... anyway, yeah,
> cocoon 2.0 could work on 1.1 just as it works on it right now... but we
> _must_ push this a little forward.
Damn.
> > Really I shouldn't care as I use 1.2.2 for development, but we'll
probably
> > be using IBM's 1.1.8 for Linux for real use as it is sooo much faster.
> Ok, this all comes down to the real issue: performance.
> I _KNOW_ that IBM JDK 1.2 for both win32 and linux (codename Colorado)
> is ready to ship and faster than 1.1.8 on both platforms.
> So, do you seriously believe that by October they would not release it?
How is it faster? A better Hotspot, or just well written? C'mon man -
spill the beans! :-)
If Sun release Colorado by then, I'll be very happy. Then I'll probably be
happy with 1.2 mainly, though I think it may be a good idea to implement
MemoryStore for Cocoon 2 like it is now, terrible but (sort of) working
1.1.x code. Then, if need be,it can be plugged in.
Ross Burton
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> > As far as I can see it:
> > * Swing (not relevant)
>
> Swing can be used in 1.1 also.
I believe the meaning was the new Swing/AWT/Java2D
> > Really I shouldn't care as I use 1.2.2 for development, but we'll probably
> > be using IBM's 1.1.8 for Linux for real use as it is sooo much faster.
>
> Ok, this all comes down to the real issue: performance.
>
> I _KNOW_ that IBM JDK 1.2 for both win32 and linux (codename Colorado)
> is ready to ship and faster than 1.1.8 on both platforms.
>
> So, do you seriously believe that by October they would not release it?
>
> Well, if that doesn't happen and IBM has serious issues with Sun, having
> Cocoon tied to 1.2 is going to be the least of your troubles :)
On a sidenote... I WANT 1.2 :) :) :)
Performance-wise, the linux guys have still a long road ahead, before
complaining about the performances of their VMs... But that's another
topic...
We're talking about OCTOBER... Geee... More than 6 MONTHS... Someone
WILL DO SOMETHING for Linux by then, and if we develop on the 1.2 we'll
have more and more people going to ask to VM vendors to bring the 1.2
platform on their systems...
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Ross Burton wrote:
>
> > > What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
> > > the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
> > > people with the ability to have basic functionality?
> > >
> > > Comments appreciated.
> >
> > We still have a good 6 months of development... If in 6 months they'll
> > not catch up with a 1.2 JVM... Well, sorry...
> > I just started using the 1.3, so, please, at least let me develop
> > against the 1.2 :) :) :)
>
> What are the actual advantages of 1.2.x opposed to 1.1.x?
>
> As far as I can see it:
> * Swing (not relevant)
Swing can be used in 1.1 also.
> * Collections (appaling architecture, and if we really need powerful ADTs
> then use the JGL)
Collections can be used in 1.1 also.
> * Classloader extensions? I've heard this but are they useful? It seems
> that the current problem with classloaders stems from bugs in JServ/Tomcat.
The problem could be worked around.
> I like having the core system 1.1.x, and as many plugins 1.1.x too, but
> 1.2.x is they need to be.
There is only one place where we can't have 1.1: MemoryStore. I love the
idea of weak references and I'm sure that we can get around some
implementation limitations by fragmenting the memory... anyway, yeah,
cocoon 2.0 could work on 1.1 just as it works on it right now... but we
_must_ push this a little forward.
> Really I shouldn't care as I use 1.2.2 for development, but we'll probably
> be using IBM's 1.1.8 for Linux for real use as it is sooo much faster.
Ok, this all comes down to the real issue: performance.
I _KNOW_ that IBM JDK 1.2 for both win32 and linux (codename Colorado)
is ready to ship and faster than 1.1.8 on both platforms.
So, do you seriously believe that by October they would not release it?
Well, if that doesn't happen and IBM has serious issues with Sun, having
Cocoon tied to 1.2 is going to be the least of your troubles :)
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Ross Burton <ro...@mail.com>.
> > What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
> > the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
> > people with the ability to have basic functionality?
> >
> > Comments appreciated.
>
> We still have a good 6 months of development... If in 6 months they'll
> not catch up with a 1.2 JVM... Well, sorry...
> I just started using the 1.3, so, please, at least let me develop
> against the 1.2 :) :) :)
What are the actual advantages of 1.2.x opposed to 1.1.x?
As far as I can see it:
* Swing (not relevant)
* Collections (appaling architecture, and if we really need powerful ADTs
then use the JGL)
* Classloader extensions? I've heard this but are they useful? It seems
that the current problem with classloaders stems from bugs in JServ/Tomcat.
I like having the core system 1.1.x, and as many plugins 1.1.x too, but
1.2.x is they need to be.
Really I shouldn't care as I use 1.2.2 for development, but we'll probably
be using IBM's 1.1.8 for Linux for real use as it is sooo much faster.
Ross Burton
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> Jeremy Quinn wrote:
> >
> > On 17/3/00 at 2:40 pm, stefano@apache.org (Stefano Mazzocchi) wrote:
> >
> > >On second thought, this is JDK 1.2 so can't use it for Cocoon 1.x
> > >
> > >But it's a good suggestion anyway... we'll use it for Cocoon2 that will
> > >be JDK 1.2 based.
> >
> > Gulp!
> >
> > Are you saying Cocoon 2 will only run under Java 1.2?
> > I hope not, there is no Java 1.2 for several platforms ....
>
> Win95/98/NT/2000 - yes
> Solaris - yes
> Linux - yes
> FreeBSD - yes (via linux emulation)
> AIX/AS400 - rumors that IBM JDK 1.2 was put on hold to put political
> pressure on Sun but it's ready to be shipped... may happen any day.
>
> So, what are we missing... oh yeah
>
> Beos
> QNX
> IRIX
> and last but not least MacOS
>
> What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
> the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
> people with the ability to have basic functionality?
>
> Comments appreciated.
We still have a good 6 months of development... If in 6 months they'll
not catch up with a 1.2 JVM... Well, sorry...
I just started using the 1.3, so, please, at least let me develop
against the 1.2 :) :) :)
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Falko Braeutigam <fa...@softwarebuero.de>.
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > > Beos
> > > QNX
> > > IRIX
> > > and last but not least MacOS
>
> And The various non-Intel flavors of Linux - I haven't seen a java2 JDK for
> Linux on DEC Alpha, PPC, or Sparc yet.
There is a pointer somewhere at blackdown.org where you can get jdk1.2 for
Linux/Alpha. No JIT but runs fine. Because of some Sun license terms an
jdk1.2.2 or later will not be available from this source AFAIK. Hopefully Compaq
comes out with a Linux port of the True64 VM soon.
Falko
--
______________________________________________________________________
Falko Braeutigam mailto:falko@softwarebuero.de
softwarebuero m&b (SMB) http://www.softwarebuero.de
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Kevin Sonney <ke...@webslingerZ.com>.
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, George Henry C. Daswani wrote:
> Blackdown has 1.2.2 JDK RC4 for Both Sparc and PPC on their site..
I found those. It's the alpha I really need, though <grin>. I found one port
that was very processor specific that hadn't been updated since 1.2.1, and
nothign else.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for compaq to do the port....
--
- Kevin Sonney
kevin@webslingerZ.com
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by "George Henry C. Daswani" <gd...@esri.com>.
Hmmm,
Blackdown has 1.2.2 JDK RC4 for Both Sparc and PPC on their site..
George
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Sonney" <ke...@webslingerz.com>
To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 3:27 AM
Subject: Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > > Beos
> > > QNX
> > > IRIX
> > > and last but not least MacOS
>
> And The various non-Intel flavors of Linux - I haven't seen a java2 JDK
for
> Linux on DEC Alpha, PPC, or Sparc yet.
>
> Although if someone else has a pointer, a URL, or practical experience....
>
> ...or knows how to make Kaffe work with JServ/Cocoon....
>
> --
> - Kevin Sonney
> kevin@webslingerZ.com
>
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Kevin Sonney <ke...@webslingerz.com>.
On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > Beos
> > QNX
> > IRIX
> > and last but not least MacOS
And The various non-Intel flavors of Linux - I haven't seen a java2 JDK for
Linux on DEC Alpha, PPC, or Sparc yet.
Although if someone else has a pointer, a URL, or practical experience....
...or knows how to make Kaffe work with JServ/Cocoon....
--
- Kevin Sonney
kevin@webslingerZ.com
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Ian Abbott wrote:
>
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >
> > > Are you saying Cocoon 2 will only run under Java 1.2?
> > > I hope not, there is no Java 1.2 for several platforms ....
> >
> > Beos
> > QNX
> > IRIX
> > and last but not least MacOS
> >
> > What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
> > the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
> > people with the ability to have basic functionality?
> >
>
> I'm running Cocoon 1.7-dev on SGI IRIX 6.5.7 with JDK 1.2.2...
>
> You can download it from
> http://www.sgi.com/developers/devtools/languages/java2_122.html
>
> JDK 1.2.x on IRIX has been out for quite few months now...
Cool, didn't know that.
> So, go with JDK 1.2. I mean, who'd use a MacOS system to host a
> webserver? :)
...well, to be quite honest, I'm developing Cocoon on Win98... yeah,
people, the magic tool you all love comes from a stupid platform... why?
well, if it works on my system works on everyone else's :)
But I agree, I don't think there is enough need for 1.1 back
compatibility anymore.
And, besides, those systems who don't have a 1.2 platform should be
somehow _pushed_ to do so. The only way is to start writing killer-apps
that need 1.2 to work.
Besides, if we stick on 1.1 forever, what's the point on pushing for a
more open java platform?
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Missed us in Orlando? Make it up with ApacheCON Europe in London!
------------------------- http://ApacheCon.Com ---------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@media.demon.co.uk>.
On 20/3/00 at 9:35 am, iana@cinesite.co.uk (Ian Abbott) wrote:
>So, go with JDK 1.2. I mean, who'd use a MacOS system to host a
>webserver? :)
Ha Ha Ha!
The US Army for one :)
OK, no platform wars ...
regards Jeremy
____________________________________________________________________
Jeremy Quinn media.demon
webSpace Design
<ma...@media.demon.co.uk> <http://www.media.demon.co.uk>
<phone:+44.[0].207.737.6831> <pa...@sms.genie.co.uk>
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Ian Abbott <ia...@cinesite.co.uk>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> > Are you saying Cocoon 2 will only run under Java 1.2?
> > I hope not, there is no Java 1.2 for several platforms ....
>
> Beos
> QNX
> IRIX
> and last but not least MacOS
>
> What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
> the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
> people with the ability to have basic functionality?
>
I'm running Cocoon 1.7-dev on SGI IRIX 6.5.7 with JDK 1.2.2...
You can download it from
http://www.sgi.com/developers/devtools/languages/java2_122.html
JDK 1.2.x on IRIX has been out for quite few months now...
So, go with JDK 1.2. I mean, who'd use a MacOS system to host a
webserver? :)
Ian
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>
> I don't entirely agree, it has been a very stable and powerful (and
> accessible) server platform for me for years. I've got servers that
> have not been rebooted for over a year ....
I know... But the multitasking environment is not the best you can get,
performance-wise, under load there are other OSs who respond better and
so on... Look, I am one of the greatest MAC fans on this planet, but I
still prefer a good Unix kernel to serve my 10000000s hits/sec :)
> But I am looking forward to MacOSX same as you!
The MacOSX Server works _REALLY_ good... On a G4/500 (I believe) it was
serving pages like a champ, and the GUI _IS_ nice ( not like that X
stuff on other unices!)
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@media.demon.co.uk>.
On 22/3/00 at 7:08 pm, pier@apache.org (Pierpaolo Fumagalli) wrote:
>> If he is right, it looks like an update to Java >1.1n will happen when
>> MacOS X Client comes out late this year. MacOS X is built on top of a
>> Unix kernal and NextStep etc.
>
>I heard the same voice... And BTW, Cocoon is _designed_ to work in
>server side environments (and I wouldn't trust to run my server on MacOS
>8/9, expecially since I've tried out MacOS-X two days ago... it's
>_GREAT_)...
I don't entirely agree, it has been a very stable and powerful (and accessible) server platform for me for years. I've got servers that have not been rebooted for over a year ....
But I am looking forward to MacOSX same as you!
regards Jeremy
____________________________________________________________________
Jeremy Quinn media.demon
webSpace Design
<ma...@media.demon.co.uk> <http://www.media.demon.co.uk>
<phone:+44.[0].207.737.6831> <pa...@sms.genie.co.uk>
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Pierpaolo Fumagalli <pi...@apache.org>.
Jeremy Quinn wrote:
>
> If he is right, it looks like an update to Java >1.1n will happen when
> MacOS X Client comes out late this year. MacOS X is built on top of a
> Unix kernal and NextStep etc.
I heard the same voice... And BTW, Cocoon is _designed_ to work in
server side environments (and I wouldn't trust to run my server on MacOS
8/9, expecially since I've tried out MacOS-X two days ago... it's
_GREAT_)...
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pier: stable structure erected over water to allow docking of seacraft
<ma...@betaversion.org> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: JDK 1.2 vs 1.1: the never-ending story.
Posted by Jeremy Quinn <je...@media.demon.co.uk>.
On 19/3/00 at 12:20 am, stefano@apache.org (Stefano Mazzocchi) wrote:
>> Gulp!
>>
>> Are you saying Cocoon 2 will only run under Java 1.2?
>> I hope not, there is no Java 1.2 for several platforms ....
>
>Win95/98/NT/2000 - yes
>Solaris - yes
>Linux - yes
>FreeBSD - yes (via linux emulation)
>AIX/AS400 - rumors that IBM JDK 1.2 was put on hold to put political
>pressure on Sun but it's ready to be shipped... may happen any day.
>
>So, what are we missing... oh yeah
>
>Beos
>QNX
>IRIX
>and last but not least MacOS
This is worse than I thought!
Just spoke to a friend who is on a MRJ list about what Apple is up to regarding Java 1.2. He says:
>Well it
>looks like Apple have finished the MRJ3.0 (aka Java 1.3), looks like the Mac
>wont ever get a Java1.2 version ever.
[...]
>Apple say that MacOS 8,9 wont be seeing MRJ3
>Looks like a dev push for MacOS X Client.
[...]
>Maybe Apple have done it and have some stuff to still sort out, SUN JavaOne
>say that Apple are now ahead of them on there spec. The Java Bean stuff on
>the MacOS MRJ2.2 is way better then SUN's. Infact the SUN Java2 Bean lib
>isent it the spec. :) funny...
If he is right, it looks like an update to Java >1.1n will happen when MacOS X Client comes out late this year. MacOS X is built on top of a Unix kernal and NextStep etc.
>What do you guys think? Should we still aim for Java 1.1? Or just keep
>the core 1.1 and add plugins that require 1.2 separate but still leaving
>people with the ability to have basic functionality?
>Comments appreciated.
If moving to Java 1.2 would make the development easier, then it should happen.
It has to happen sooner or later ... it looks like Java 1.2 is widely handled enough to make it worthwhile.
While it would definately be convenient to be able to run parts of Cocoon under Java 1.1n, if this gets in the way of the dev effort, considering the numbers involved, it does not sound worth it.
I hate to say this, I don't want to be cut off from Cocoon 2, even for a relativly short time :) But if it makes sense in terms of the development, then I reckon it should happen.
regards Jeremy
____________________________________________________________________
Jeremy Quinn media.demon
webSpace Design
<ma...@media.demon.co.uk> <http://www.media.demon.co.uk>
<phone:+44.[0].207.737.6831> <pa...@sms.genie.co.uk>