On 20. juli 2013 at 5:34 PM, "Jan Stary" wrote:
>
>Why are you building the (huge) port,
>instead of simply installing the package?
Whoa. When did that get there? Thanks man!
O.D.
On 20. juli 2013 at 3:54 PM, "Amit Kulkarni" wrote:
>>
>> Nope, plenty of disk space left in /usr/local (my ports are in
>> /usr/local/ports).
>
>why are ports inside /usr/local. it should be /usr/ports. Some
>ports may fail.
Maybe, yeah. I updated PORTSDIR in /etc/mk.conf though. Anyway I just
On 19. juli 2013 at 9:13 PM, "Miod Vallat" wrote:
>
>> Pretty sure it takes more than 1.7G to build Java.
>
>But then how can java people pretend it has any usefulness, besides
>filing disks?
They say Android apps are just an excuse for Java devs to keep programming in
Java. Now that HTML5 can a
On 07/19/13 18:37, Martin Schröder wrote:
> 2013/7/19 :
>> % df -h
>> Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
>> /dev/wd0a 985M 50.8M885M 5%/
>> /dev/wd0k 9.2G434M8.3G 5%/home
>> /dev/wd0d 1.5G 12.0K1.5G 0%/tmp
>> /dev/wd0
> Pretty sure it takes more than 1.7G to build Java.
But then how can java people pretend it has any usefulness, besides
filing disks?
Miod
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 03:06:16PM -0600, Jack Woehr wrote:
> openda...@hushmail.com wrote:
> >On 19. juli 2013 at 3:17 PM, "Matthew Dempsky" wrote:
> >>plenty of disk space left in /usr/local (my ports are in /usr/local/ports).
> >>
> >>
> >>/dev/wd0h 3.7G1.8G1.7G52%/usr/loca
2013/7/19 :
> % df -h
> Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
> /dev/wd0a 985M 50.8M885M 5%/
> /dev/wd0k 9.2G434M8.3G 5%/home
> /dev/wd0d 1.5G 12.0K1.5G 0%/tmp
> /dev/wd0f 1.8G404M1.3G24%/usr
> /dev/
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 08:37:40PM +, openda...@hushmail.com wrote:
> On 19. juli 2013 at 3:17 PM, "Matthew Dempsky" wrote:
> >
> >"write error"? Did you run out of disk space?
>
> Nope, plenty of disk space left in /usr/local (my ports are in
> /usr/local/ports).
>
> % df -h
Check also t
openda...@hushmail.com wrote:
On 19. juli 2013 at 3:17 PM, "Matthew Dempsky" wrote:
plenty of disk space left in /usr/local (my ports are in /usr/local/ports).
/dev/wd0h 3.7G1.8G1.7G52%/usr/local
Pretty sure it takes more than 1.7G to build Java.
--
Jack Woehr
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Jack Woehr wrote:
> Miod Vallat wrote:
>>>
>>> Pretty sure it takes more than 1.7G to build Java.
>>
>> But then how can java people pretend it has any usefulness, besides
>> filing disks?
>>
>> Miod
>
>
> métaphysico-théologo-cosmolo-nigologie :)
Hey, what editor
Miod Vallat wrote:
Pretty sure it takes more than 1.7G to build Java.
But then how can java people pretend it has any usefulness, besides
filing disks?
Miod
métaphysico-théologo-cosmolo-nigologie :)
Language wars are s-o-o-o 20th century.
--
Jack Woehr # "We commonly say we h
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 09:12:57PM +, Miod Vallat wrote:
> > Pretty sure it takes more than 1.7G to build Java.
>
> But then how can java people pretend it has any usefulness, besides
> filing disks?
^^
Rightful cobol successor, then
See yesterday's dilbert...
http://dilbert.com/strip
On 19. juli 2013 at 3:17 PM, "Matthew Dempsky" wrote:
>
>"write error"? Did you run out of disk space?
Nope, plenty of disk space left in /usr/local (my ports are in
/usr/local/ports).
% df -h
Filesystem SizeUsed Avail Capacity Mounted on
/dev/wd0a 985M 50.8M885M 5%
Hi,
Anybody managed to build /usr/ports/devel/jdk on OpenBSD 5.3?
Getting a rather nasty compile error here on amd64, was wondering if maybe
someone could help? Tried asking on the ports mailinglist as well as reaching
out to the port maintainer but no luck.
http://pastie.org/8155843
O.D.
"write error"? Did you run out of disk space?
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:55 AM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Anybody managed to build /usr/ports/devel/jdk on OpenBSD 5.3?
>
> Getting a rather nasty compile error here on amd64, was wondering if maybe
> someone could help? Tried asking on the ports mailingli
On 1/12/07, Kurt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Attached are two patch files that you can drop
in /usr/ports/devel/jdk/1.5/patches that hopefully
will fix your amd64 build issue. Please let me know
if this fixes it for you and I'll work on getting
this in 4.0-stable.
Thank you very much, the
On 1/10/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The only outstanding question is, has "bofh" gotten 1.5 to compile and
install correctly on his amd64 box with Kurt's previous suggestion?
? The first note from Kurt says he's working on a patch, and the
second mentioned a thread in ports@, a
Gustavo Rios [2007-01-09, 13:37:37]:
> Is it possible to build jdk;java directly from openbsd: I always
> believed i had to "install" linux emulation first.
if something is unclear about the section 'Building the Sun JDK' in
FAQ 8, please let us know what it is.
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 12:26, Zoong PHAM wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 13:37:37 -0300, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> > Is it possible to build jdk;java directly from openbsd: I always
> > believed i had to "install" linux emulation first.
>
> No, I don't think so.
>
> I just installed jdk-1.5
On Tuesday, 9 January 2007 at 13:37:37 -0300, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> Is it possible to build jdk;java directly from openbsd: I always
> believed i had to "install" linux emulation first.
No, I don't think so.
I just installed jdk-1.5.0p19
from the port: very much "make; make install"
After that,
On 9-Jan-07, at 12:42 PM, J.C. Roberts wrote:
The painfully sad truth is if you're doing any serious development and
testing in Java, you have to debug everywhere and you normally need to
have ton of jre/jdk installations on each of your supported OS/
hardware
combinations. You really do need m
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 09:08, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> > When I built 1.5 on openbsd 3.9-current, it didn't require building
> > 1.3 and 1.4. It didn't look like 4.0 needed it either. In fact,
> > on amd64, it won't build jdk1.4
>
> Though people joke about the chicken-egg problem, you need a wo
On Monday 08 January 2007 8:38 pm, bofh wrote:
> What am I doing wrong? This is openbsd 4.0 on a DL145, dual opteron.
> Thanx for any pointers!
I've replied to your build problem on the ports@ list, but
just to clarify some things said in this thread:
Beginning with OpenBSD 4.0 devel/jdk/1.5 no
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 08:37, Gustavo Rios wrote:
> Is it possible to build jdk;java directly from openbsd: I always
> believed i had to "install" linux emulation first.
>
> Thanks for the clarifications.
Hi Gustavo,
For building 1.4, you need the 1.3-linux port installed. The latter
require
probably best to keep this on list...
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 08:37, bofh wrote:
> On 1/9/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've been in no rush to build and install java, and in fact I've
> > been dreading the idea for a couple months but since you're hitting
> > problems, I deci
Oops, didn't not send to misc
On 1/9/07, bofh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/9/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've been in no rush to build and install java, and in fact I've been
> dreading the idea for a couple months but since you're hitting
> problems, I decided to start on
Is it possible to build jdk;java directly from openbsd: I always
believed i had to "install" linux emulation first.
Thanks for the clarifications.
On 1/9/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 06:20, bofh wrote:
> On 1/9/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
On Tuesday 09 January 2007 06:20, bofh wrote:
> On 1/9/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Monday 08 January 2007 17:38, bofh wrote:
> > > I tried installing the jdk I had built under 3.9, jdk-1.5.0p14,
> > > that installed without problems, however:
> >
> > It has been said many, ma
On 1/9/07, J.C. Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Monday 08 January 2007 17:38, bofh wrote:
> I tried installing the jdk I had built under 3.9, jdk-1.5.0p14, that
> installed without problems, however:
It has been said many, many times yet people still regularly make same
the mistake which y
On Monday 08 January 2007 17:38, bofh wrote:
> I tried installing the jdk I had built under 3.9, jdk-1.5.0p14, that
> installed without problems, however:
It has been said many, many times yet people still regularly make same
the mistake which you have made: Packages (and ports) from one version
Hi,
I am trying to compile jdk on openbsd 4.0. I max'ed out all the
ulimits I can find:
# ulimit -a
time(cpu-seconds)unlimited
file(blocks) unlimited
coredump(blocks) unlimited
data(kbytes) 1048576
stack(kbytes)32768
lockedmem(kbytes)unlimited
memory(kbytes)
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:27:36PM +0100, Matthias Kilian wrote:
[snip]
> It does not run on arm/OpenBSD. It does not run on powerpc/OpenBSD.
> It does not run on vax/OpenBSD. Heck, it even behaves differently
> in on i386/Linux, i386/Windows, sparc/Solaris and pSeries/Linux,
> and to this platfo
On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 11:31:21AM +0800, Lars Hansson wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 10:53:54 -0500
> Josh Grosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Per FAQ 8.3, Java 1.5 or 1.4 must be built from source. An overnight
> > download have an
> > of the files should not be a huge problem, considering
- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 11:18:36 -0800
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: java on openbsd]
To: Keith Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Quoting Keith Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I would, but I would just be (poorly) repeating information that
>developers have painstakingly documented.
>http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#Programming
I've read that info; the "preferred" way of installing java (on
openbsd) is by compiling from source. As I am a full
ld, but I would just be (poorly) repeating information that
> >developers have painstakingly documented.
> >http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#Programming
>
> I've read that info; the "preferred" way of installing java (on
> openbsd) is by compiling from source. As
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 11:31:21 +0800
Lars Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> install X number of Linux JDK's
Apparently you dont need this anymore. Duh!
---
Lars Hansson
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 10:53:54 -0500
Josh Grosse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Per FAQ 8.3, Java 1.5 or 1.4 must be built from source. An overnight
> download have an
> of the files should not be a huge problem, considering how much time,
> computing, memory, and storage resource is needed to bui
On 14-Nov-06, at 5:27 PM, Matthias Kilian wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 10:12:31PM +0100, Tobias Weisserth wrote:
And regarding the language: Java runs on millions if not billions
of devices.
It does not run on arm/OpenBSD. It does not run on powerpc/OpenBSD.
It does not run on vax/OpenBSD.
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 11:41:35AM -0600, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> > @others: stop picking on SUN and Java. It's actually a nice language
> > and going to be GPL software very soon, so I guess there will be an
> > option for binary packages and other nice stuff soon.
>
> Java is a shitshow
No
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 12:32:57PM -0600, Matthew Weigel wrote:
> Bernd Schoeller wrote:
> > I this information still current, now that Java has released the JDK
> > under the terms of the GPL?
>
> No, they haven't released the JDK under the GPL. They *will*.
> Currently, they have released a vir
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 08:07:50AM -0500, Marc Ravensbergen wrote:
> Hi, first I'd like to mention that openbsd 4.0 is a first for me, and I
> am really liking it so far (I am a linux refugee...). Eg., it's nice to
> be able to rip out my usb cd burner, plug it in, and be able to actually
> use
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 10:12:31PM +0100, Tobias Weisserth wrote:
> And regarding the language: Java runs on millions if not billions
> of devices.
It does not run on arm/OpenBSD. It does not run on powerpc/OpenBSD.
It does not run on vax/OpenBSD. Heck, it even behaves differently
in on i386/Linux
Hi list, hi Jacob,
On Tuesday, 14. November 2006 19:35, Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote:
> >Java is a shitshow, it isn't a "nice" language. Stop defending Sun and
> > their ridiculous licenses. The day Sun shows up as a real player in the
> > open source world this could be justified. For now they are
Heh, java lets me work on OpenBSD. Oh, wait... that's just plain
coffee, and not even Javanese coffee. Costa Rican.
God, I'm a troll today.
On 11/14/06, Jack J. Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Did you get it working? I have Java working on OpenBSD.
--
Try to do nothing for money that you
On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 08:07:50AM -0500, Marc Ravensbergen wrote:
> ...I am having a hard time getting java to work on openbsd. Java is a
> deal-breaker for me as I use it all day every day for work. What I've
> done is taken a tar of the linux version...
> ...I really don't want to download th
Matthew Weigel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your response. Kaffe won't work for me as it is missing a few
>> feature s that I need (most notable swing support is not up to snuff yet).
>
> For now, then, unfortunately you'll have to follow the normal
> port
On Nov 14, 2006, at 9:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> All I asked for was some advice getting this working. If you're
> going to bash me over the head for that, perhaps you'd consider not
> replying at all... save both your time and mine.
Did you get it working? I have Java working on OpenB
Original message
>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:41:35 -0600
>From: Marco Peereboom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: java on openbsd
>To: Tobias Weisserth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: misc@openbsd.org
>
>> @others: stop picking on SUN and Java. It's a
* Bernd Schoeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-11-14 19:25]:
> I this information still current, now that Java has released the JDK under
> the terms of the GPL?
they have _not_ released the JDK (-source) under the gpl.
they have released javac, hotpot and the help system under the gpl (at
lest,
On Nov 14, 2006, at 10:41 AM, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> Java is a shitshow, it isn't a "nice" language.
Hurling obscenities at Java, a mediocre language per se which happens
to offer
a wonderful team development environment with a breathtaking array of
tools,
doesn't generate any code to make
Bernd Schoeller wrote:
> I this information still current, now that Java has released the JDK
> under the terms of the GPL?
No, they haven't released the JDK under the GPL. They *will*.
Currently, they have released a virtual machine and javac under the GPL.
"The remainder of the open-source JDK
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:42:39 +0100, Nick Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Java's unsupported more or less. See the FAQ:
http://openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#Programming
"Due to Sun's restrictive SCSL license, OpenBSD cannot ship binary
packages for the JDK. This means you will have to build it fr
> @others: stop picking on SUN and Java. It's actually a nice language
> and going to be GPL software very soon, so I guess there will be an
> option for binary packages and other nice stuff soon.
Java is a shitshow, it isn't a "nice" language. Stop defending Sun and their
ridiculous licenses
I would just be (poorly) repeating information that
developers have painstakingly documented.
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq8.html#Programming
I've read that info; the "preferred" way of installing java (on
openbsd) is by compiling from source. As I am a full time java
developer,
Hi Marc,
On Nov 14, 2006, at 5:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
I didn't try any linux 1.5/1.6 jdk, but perhaps you missed something
for your linux emulation? read man compat_linux, perhaps it helps.
the other options you have is having someone mail you the source on
cd, or use kaffe (don't
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks for your response. Kaffe won't work for me as it is missing a few
> feature s that I need (most notable swing support is not up to snuff yet).
For now, then, unfortunately you'll have to follow the normal
port-building instructions, which are lame to say the leas
Quoting knitti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 11/14/06, Marc Ravensbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am having a hard time getting java to work on openbsd. Java is a
deal-breaker for me as I use it all day every day for work. What I've
done is taken a tar of the linux version, and untarred it in ope
On 11/14/06, Marc Ravensbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, first I'd like to mention that openbsd 4.0 is a first for me, and I
am really liking it so far (I am a linux refugee...).
I am having a hard time getting java to work on openbsd.
Thanks for your time,
Marc
Java's unsupported more
On 11/14/06, Marc Ravensbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am having a hard time getting java to work on openbsd. Java is a
deal-breaker for me as I use it all day every day for work. What I've
done is taken a tar of the linux version, and untarred it in openbsd. I
have turned on linux emulation
On 11/14/06, Marc Ravensbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am having a hard time getting java to work on openbsd.
I'll bet.
difference. I've googled for hours trying to find a solution, but can't
seem to fix it.
Lucky for you! My google works: http://www.google.com/search?q=openbsd+java
Hi, first I'd like to mention that openbsd 4.0 is a first for me, and I
am really liking it so far (I am a linux refugee...). Eg., it's nice to
be able to rip out my usb cd burner, plug it in, and be able to actually
use the thing again. Try that under linux and the cd burner is unsuable
until
On 8/8/05, Edd Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Suns newest ultra 20 x64 workstation retails at under #1000.
>
> Not as expensive as they once were.
>
that is out of desperation; not because that's what they are worth.
aaron.glenn
On Monday, 8 August 2005 at 18:03:25 +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
>
> Suns newest ultra 20 x64 workstation retails at under #1000.
>
> Not as expensive as they once were.
I never think Sun stuff expensive compared to other big vendors.
In fact, Sun charge the least but we hardly buy them b/c of th
> You know, for every Kurt, there have to be several hundred people
> (OpenBSD users or otherwise) who say "if I wanted to deal with Sun every
> day, I'd run Solaris instead" and frankly, I don't blame them. Every
> attempt to use Java here has caused more problems than it has solved;
> it's simply
On Mon, 08 Aug 2005 11:02:47 -0400, Kurt Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Kurt,
>>
>> Really, no disparagement was meant of your efforts. My apologies for
>> any offense.
>>
>> I can't see spending my time working on Sun's code, but that's your
>> choice, and if it works for you more power
* Shawn K. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-08-08 17:18]:
> You know, for every Kurt, there have to be several hundred people
> (OpenBSD users or otherwise) who say "if I wanted to deal with Sun every
> day, I'd run Solaris instead" and frankly, I don't blame them. Every
> attempt to use Java here h
Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
>On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 10:23 -0400, Michael W. Lucas wrote:
>
>
>>I can't see spending my time working on Sun's code, but that's your
>>choice, and if it works for you more power to you.
>>
>>
>
>You know, for every Kurt, there have to be several hundred people
>(OpenBS
On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 10:23 -0400, Michael W. Lucas wrote:
> I can't see spending my time working on Sun's code, but that's your
> choice, and if it works for you more power to you.
You know, for every Kurt, there have to be several hundred people
(OpenBSD users or otherwise) who say "if I wanted
x27;s code, but that's your
choice, and if it works for you more power to you.
Thanks for the apology. Your post struck a nerve and my frustration
with the amount of misinformation in this thread came out. Few people
really understand the Java - *BSD licensing issues. For what seems
like ide
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 10:05:38AM -0400, Kurt Miller wrote:
> From: "Michael W. Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:12:24PM -0700, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> >>The FreeBSD guys sold their soul to Sun in a "license agreement" of
> >>some sort in order to use Sun's code as a base for
From: "Anon Y. Mous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi:
Has anyone involved with OpenBSD development
attempted to negotiate a license with Sun for a Java
binaries usage agreement, (e.g., FreeBSD/Sun
agreement)?
As stated several times in this thread, the type of license
that FreeBSD has with Sun goes a
From: "Michael W. Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:12:24PM -0700, J.C. Roberts wrote:
The FreeBSD guys sold their soul to Sun in a "license agreement" of
some sort in order to use Sun's code as a base for their native
implementation.
Sorry, not quite.
The FreeBSD-native
Let's read what I wrote and your response, shall we?
Edd Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Encourage and
> > promote closed 'standards', insecure, crappy binaries and software
> > monopolies."?
>
> I think it would be a good idea.
Maybe you do. Fortunately most of us don't.
//art
That is what you do for /ports/devel/jdk/ . So what is your problem? ;-)
2005/8/8, Edd Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I think it would be a good idea. Even if you had to download an
> openbsd package from sun's site.
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:12:24PM -0700, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> The FreeBSD guys sold their soul to Sun in a "license agreement" of
> some sort in order to use Sun's code as a base for their native
> implementation.
Sorry, not quite.
The FreeBSD-native Java implementation did not require changin
On 08 Aug 2005 10:51:14 +0200, Artur Grabowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Anon Y. Mous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi:
> >
> >
> > Has anyone involved with OpenBSD development
> > attempted to negotiate a license with Sun for a Java
> > binaries usage agreement, (e.g., FreeBSD/Sun
> >
"Anon Y. Mous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi:
>
>
> Has anyone involved with OpenBSD development
> attempted to negotiate a license with Sun for a Java
> binaries usage agreement, (e.g., FreeBSD/Sun
> agreement)?
>
> URL: http://www.freebsd.org/java/
>
> "The FreeBSD Foundation has negotia
On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 14:38:30 -0400, "Jan Izary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>Please release the source code of your software under a BSD license so
>it is compatible with the goals of our project:
>
>J. C., you know full well that's not really needed for OpenBSD to have their
>own copy of Java in
I am sure JC is pretty accurate here though.
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 02:38:30PM -0400, Jan Izary wrote:
> >Please release the source code of your software under a BSD license so
> it is compatible with the goals of our project:
>
> J. C., you know full well that's not really needed for OpenBSD to
Please release the source code of your software under a BSD license so
it is compatible with the goals of our project:
J. C., you know full well that's not really needed for OpenBSD to have their
own copy of Java in ports.
Making something like Java a native port would only require it to be o
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 01:04:51 -0700 (PDT), "Anon Y. Mous"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone involved with OpenBSD development
>attempted to negotiate a license with Sun for a Java
>binaries usage agreement
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Bill, Larry and Scot
Hi:
Has anyone involved with OpenBSD development
attempted to negotiate a license with Sun for a Java
binaries usage agreement, (e.g., FreeBSD/Sun
agreement)?
URL: http://www.freebsd.org/java/
"The FreeBSD Foundation has negotiated a license with
Sun Microsystems to distribute FreeBSD binarie
83 matches
Mail list logo
