Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Java Programming Software Sun Microsystems Linux

64-Bit Java For Linux 387

Posted by kdawson
from the tipping-point dept.
LWATCDR writes "First we got 64-bit Flash; then the beginnings of 64-bit Wine; now Sun is providing a 64-bit Java plugin. For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

64-Bit Java For Linux

Comments Filter:
  • what is this, moulin rouge ?
    • by MaskedSlacker (911878) on Monday December 15, 2008 @10:50PM (#26128239)

      Looks blue to me

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        64-bit Slashdot still has a few kinks to work out.

        • by tomhudson (43916) <barbara.hudson@NoSPam.barbara-hudson.com> on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @12:50AM (#26129099) Journal

          Well, if it were running on 64-bit java instead of 64-bit perl, it wouldn't - java ints are still only 32 bits in "64 bit java. [blogspot.com]

          Someone forgot to future-proof their language. 10 years from now, when you're running a 128-bit cpu with a quarter-terrabyte of ram, those 32-bit signed ints are going to look mighty quaint. "What do you mean, I can't store the [file size|number of inodes|ipv6 address|whatever] in a 128-bit int? What do you mean, 128-bit java doesn't have 128-bit ints? You're shitting me, right? This is 2018 ... what's gonna happen in 2038 - we gonna have a 2k38 java problem? No? Why should I believe you? You can't even right-size your ints ..."

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by afidel (530433)
            I'm already running computers with a quarter terabyte of ram you insensitive clod.

            Seriously, the data warehouse server I'm implementing this week is an HP DL585 G5 with 4x AMD 8378 and 256GB of ram using 2x Brocade 815 8Gb HBA's =)
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by setagllib (753300)

            jint == int32_t
            jlong == int64_t

            Deal with it. When 128 becomes an issue there'll be a jlonger, or something like that. (jquad may be used for quad precision float)

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              Deal with it. When 128 becomes an issue there'll be a jlonger, or something like that. (jquad may be used for quad precision float)

              The D programming language (the Digital Mars one) has already reserved a pair of types, cent and ucent, for future use as 128-bit signed and unsigned integers.

          • by Weaselmancer (533834) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @03:14AM (#26129857)

            Write some stuff in C#/.NET sometime. Especially the embedded version. You'll see why. Every time MS puts out some patch...stuff breaks. Why? Because they do crap like this.

            I have an embedded platform that has the .NET 2.0 binaries on it, as well as a 3.5 version. And I had to hack that one in from binaries from Visual Studio manually. The 2.0 binaries don't run on 3.5. The 3.5 binaries don't run on 2.0. It *sucks*.

            So - if you suddenly doubled the size of an int it would break backwards compatibility and do this sort of horrible crap to Java. People who use java 1.2-1.6 would need their 32 bit ints. If you wanted the same box to run your 64 bit int Java, you'd need two sets of binaries. And a way to switch between them.

            Trust me, you don't actually want this.

            • by thtrgremlin (1158085) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @04:00AM (#26130087) Homepage Journal
              Either int will be a fixed size and longer ints will have another name, or you can explicitly state the size of int as a declaration. This has always been done and 'good coding' should include explicit declaration. It is when people cut corners and use "what works" that can quickly create regression bugs when backwards compatibility is integrated, but you didn't follow good coding guidelines. "That always worked fine suddenly stopped working" issue. This is also why a lot of those "bugs" don't get fixed.

              People need to follow proper coding guidelines, not try to stop things from progressing. Programming has always been progressive in this way, and just relearning the new way has never been much of a way to keep up.
              • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

                Either int will be a fixed size and longer ints will have another name, or you can explicitly state the size of int as a declaration.

                The latter is precisely what you do in Java when you say "int" - you explicitly state that you want a 32-bit, two's complement signed binary integer. This is by design of the language, and expecting "int" to remain that way is certainly not an invalid assumption or a bug.

          • The biggest reason of all is interop. A piece of Java code that runs in 32 bit mode successfully will wrap around and work exactly the same on the 64 bit platform. Perl will work differently. if a piece of Java calls a piece of identical Java and one is on 32 bit and the other 64 bit then they will work properly, Perl will behave erratically.

            Basically its the difference between a language that has been designed for longevity (Java) and one that just defaults to what ever is around (Perl).

            Defaulting to wh

      • by Surt (22457)

        I'm pretty sure most people would describe that color as green.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by nschubach (922175)

      I think the red title might be a "new/hot off the press article" color. I saw it as well, but refreshing it changes it back. At least, that's my guess.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      I'm colorblind, you insensitive clod!
  • 64 bit Java? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Monday December 15, 2008 @10:51PM (#26128255) Homepage Journal

    Linux has had 64 bit java for donkeys years... *rereads summary* - oh, Java browser plugin. A piece of the 90s I was hoping we'd all left behind.

    • by QuantumG (50515) * <qg@biodome.org> on Monday December 15, 2008 @10:57PM (#26128311) Homepage Journal

      Someone has to be slower to load than the acrobat reader plugin.

    • by glwtta (532858)
      Yeah, I was just as confused, and then just as disinterested.

      Seriously, Java plug-ins are still around for some reason?
    • Re:64 bit Java? (Score:5, Informative)

      by this great guy (922511) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @12:13AM (#26128881)

      Linux has had a full-featured 64-bit Java plugin that even includes LiveConnect [wikipedia.org] support for at least months [softwhere.org] via IcedTea [wikipedia.org], a special build by Red Hat of the official OpenJDK source tree. For example Ubuntu 8.10 ships this 64-bit plugin as the icedtea6-plugin [ubuntu.com] package, which I have been using for the past 2 months. And, no, I am not talking about the GCJ or Blackdown Java implementations which are significantly more buggy or incomplete (lacks LiveConnect support).

      What is new today is that Sun just released a development build of Java 6u12, build b02 [java.net], which includes the 64-bit plugin. However technically we still have to wait for a couple months before 6u12 is officially released. But again you can already get a 64-bit plugin based on essentially the same source tree via IcedTea.

  • by robo_mojo (997193) on Monday December 15, 2008 @10:53PM (#26128277)

    For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux.

    Lack of 64-bit {Java,Flash,Wine} doesn't hold you back from 64-bit Linux. A decent Linux distro can handle both 64-bit and 32-bit binaries.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by aled (228417)
      I think there is a problem running a 64 bit browser with a 32 bit Java plugin.
    • by micheas (231635)

      For me 32bit flash on amd64 is always on the top layer (on top of drop down menus) and crashes every few hours.

      (I assume that is what is causing it as my laptop that runs in 32bit mode has none of those issues.)

      Hopefully 64bit flash will fix those issues. (or GNASH will finally close the gap enough to work better than 32bit Flash. for youtube GNASH is better than Adobe Flash, but other than that one case GNASH fails so much more than Adobe Flash that it is hard to migrate. I wish I could spec GNASH with Mi

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by j79zlr (930600)
        64-bit flash did fix those issues. You can download the alpha version here [adobe.com]. I've been running it on Gentoo for a few weeks without issues.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by bobstreo (1320787)

      Yeah if only running wireless in 64 bit worked without the ritual blood sacrifice. Or ndiswrapper, or having to re-install with every kernel update.

      Stupid ath wireless.

      Then maybe I'd care about Java/Flash...

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Get a non-crappy wireless card.

        In all seriousness though, my wireless card (Intel 3945 ABG) didn't work with kernel 2.6.25 x64 (though it did in 2.6.24 x86), but then I upgraded to 2.6.26 x64... and it works flawlessly, without redoing any wireless configuration or reinstalling anything else. Even the LED blinks appropriately :) (I wasn't even trying to make the wireless work when I upgraded the kernel, I was trying to make my audio work. Still no luck there.)

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Froeschle (943753)
      While it is true that you can run 32 bit binaries under 64 bit Linux, one problem I have had in particular is the combination of the two. I have a 64 bit system but I could only run the 32 bit version of the Java plugin under 32 bit Firefox, which of course breaks most other existing 64 bit plugins that would not work under a 32 bit Firefox installation. There are wrappers and such but the whole thing is just a major PITA. I for one welcome the new 64 bit Java plugin!
    • by Eil (82413)

      Lack of 64-bit {Java,Flash,Wine} doesn't hold you back from 64-bit Linux. A decent Linux distro can handle both 64-bit and 32-bit binaries.

      But firefox can't. :(

  • I finally got things setup just the way I want them in my 32-bit install and now the only things that were keeping me from running 64 bit are fixed. Obviously, I now have to reinstall.
  • by rminsk (831757) on Monday December 15, 2008 @10:54PM (#26128289)
    Most of the 3rd-party applications my work run only work with with java runtime 5.0 and do not work with 6.0. Until sun provides a 64-bit version of Java 5.0 then I will be stuck on the 32-bit version with a 32-bit browser.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    The time has come to begin discussing 128 bit computing.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15, 2008 @10:59PM (#26128333)
    For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux.

    Except the fact that Microsoft Windows is superior in every aspect.
  • My employer recently outsourced timesheets to ADP, and ADP uses a horrid Java plugin. Hopefully this will get it working in Linux (well, when the site is stable enough to work--I expected better of ADP).

  • by Ostracus (1354233) on Monday December 15, 2008 @11:07PM (#26128395) Journal

    ""First we got 64-bit Flash; then the beginnings of 64-bit Wine; now Sun is providing a 64-bit Java plugin. For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux."

    Owning a 32 bit computer might be an issue.

  • So... the most desirable applications for 64 bit Linux are virtual machines to run applications meant for somewhere else?

    So much for the "mainstream" myth.

  • Not that it matters now. Sun has already lost. They have zero desktop adoption and aren't going to get any, because they treat their biggest evangelists and early adopters like crap (flash for linux? sadly, yes). As a developer, I haven't been using JavaFX at ALL. No browser adoption, doesn't run on my chosen platform, doesn't show any interest in making my platform a priority. Why the hell should I write an app that requires yet another 30 meg download?

    I get all the vendor lock in, it's not open sourc

    • by Yfrwlf (998822)
      Well there are several ways to make things cross-platform, Java is just one of many. APIs are another. It's funny that something you wouldn't expect to be cross-platform is to some degree (when Wine works), the Windows API. More cross-platform libraries and APIs, and you don't really need virtual machines.

      The OS companies and Linux distro companies don't want this to happen, but the trend is slowly creeping toward cross-platform/distro programs, and all it does is make the OS matter less, even though
      • "Operawhat?"

        op-er-a [reference.com] - noun
        1. an extended dramatic composition, in which all parts are sung to instrumental accompaniment, that usually includes arias, choruses, and recitatives, and that sometimes includes ballet. Compare comic opera, grand opera.
        2. the form or branch of musical and dramatic art represented by such compositions.
        3. the score or the words of such a composition.
        4. a performance of one: to go to the opera.
        5. (sometimes initial capital letter) an opera house or resident company: the Par

    • by Nicopa (87617)

      So the proof that the newly released JavaFX will fail is that you haven't been using it for building applications? Uhm...

  • by GPLHost-Thomas (1330431) on Monday December 15, 2008 @11:21PM (#26128499)
    But they still don't ship a debian package for Lenny with 64 bits support, we have to get the old Java 1.4...
  • Madwifi-NG (Score:2, Interesting)

    by 8086ed (876715)
    For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux.

    Except madwifi-ng drivers. I can't even count how many times people have bugged me about their Atheros cards not working in Linux, only to find that they were running a 64-bit distro.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by dido (9125)

      Well, I have a laptop that has such a card, and well, I found a version of the MadWifi drivers that works well enough [madwifi-project.org] on my 64-bit Gentoo. I must admit though that the search was incredibly frustrating, but given the recent news that Atheros has gotten more [slashdot.org] open [slashdot.org], the situation can only improve with time.

  • no DEB files? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by supernova_hq (1014429) on Monday December 15, 2008 @11:23PM (#26128519)
    What is it with large corporations and only creating RPM files for their software? I got the .bin file, but it just extracts to the current directory, without listing where all the files need to be copied to...

    If anyone can post a quick tutorial (or list of folder locations), that would be awesome.
    • Re:no DEB files? (Score:4, Informative)

      by atomic-penguin (100835) <wolfe21@NoSPAm.marshall.edu> on Monday December 15, 2008 @11:47PM (#26128695) Homepage Journal

      What is it with large corporations and only creating RPM files for their software? I got the .bin file, but it just extracts to the current directory, without listing where all the files need to be copied to...

      The simplest thing you could do, is use the "alien" package to convert it to a .deb file. The alien package manager works, most of the time, and it beats using cpio to extract the rpm file and repackage it as a deb.

      As for where the Java files go, they usually go under /usr/lib/java or /usr/lib/jre if I recall correctly.

      • Re:no DEB files? (Score:5, Informative)

        by tyrione (134248) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @12:58AM (#26129161) Homepage

        What is it with large corporations and only creating RPM files for their software? I got the .bin file, but it just extracts to the current directory, without listing where all the files need to be copied to...

        The simplest thing you could do, is use the "alien" package to convert it to a .deb file. The alien package manager works, most of the time, and it beats using cpio to extract the rpm file and repackage it as a deb.

        As for where the Java files go, they usually go under /usr/lib/java or /usr/lib/jre if I recall correctly.

        Alien is not going to fly as Debian is in the midst of moving Lenny out the door and this would first start in Experimental, then move to Unstable/Sid, which need to make sure they are lintian clean. I'm going to file a reportbug on this with the owners of openjdk-6 and get this moving into an update to the openjdk-6 all around.

    • by styrotech (136124)

      In the case of a bin file extracting to the current directory, the best place is to just extract it in /usr/local or /opt. Don't move the individual parts to places like /usr/bin /lib etc - leave those system dirs to be managed by the distros package manager.

      You may need to do stuff like symlinking the browser plugin file(s) into your browsers plugin directory and maybe adding the java bin directory to your $PATH, but that should be about it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by ADRA (37398)

      1. Sun likes to 'default all java applications to /usr/java/jdk-version or /usr/java/jre-version so feel free to copy the files to any directory you please.

      2. Add my_java_path/bin to your .bash_profile or .bashrc file so that you can run java applications from the command line

      3. Link my_java_path/lib/amd64/libnpjp2.so into your Firefox plugins directory (forget where it is)

      Restart firefox and you should be able to load any applets. You could also set JAVA_HOME to my_java_path, but that shouldn't be necessar

  • by thule (9041) on Monday December 15, 2008 @11:27PM (#26128541) Homepage

    The article implied that IcedTea (OpenJDK) is already 64-bit. My system reports the plugin as a 64-bit shared object. This release from Sun just makes it part of the official Sun Java download.


    $ rpm -ql java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin-1.6.0.0-7.b12.fc10.x86_64

    /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so

    $ file /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so

    /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0.x86_64/jre/lib/amd64/IcedTeaPlugin.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      IcedTea != OpenJDK != Sun's JRE.

      Rather, in approximate terms...
      OpenJDK = Sun's JRE download - binary blogs - Java Plugin - Java Web Start
      IcedTea = OpenJDK + GNU Classpath replacements + gcjwebplugin + netx

      So the IcedTeaPlugin.so is actually cobbled together from gcj. Red Hat decided they couldn't wait for Sun, so they sponsored GPLed IcedTea replacements for applets and jnlp.

      Today's announcement is that the 'official' Sun plugin now supports 64 bits. NB It's a totally different code-base from the IcedTea pl

  • "For most people there is nothing to hold you back from running 64-bit Linux."

    .

    Dang pesky 32-bit MacBooksPros!

    .

    Though a big Java fan, Java plugin into a browser ==fail. They should scrap it and get us a 64-bit javafx plugin.

  • Google Gears? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by at_slashdot (674436) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @12:07AM (#26128847)

    Just an example of something that doesn't work in 64 bit... not that it holds me back.

  • IBM Java (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    IBM's 64-bit Java for Linux has been out for a long time...

    http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/linux/download.html

  • by bcrowell (177657) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @12:17AM (#26128895) Homepage

    What already works for me on 64-bit Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex is this:

    apt-get install openjdk-6-jre openjdk-6-jdk icedtea-gcjwebplugin

    Sun has always made it a royal pain to use their java. For years they've always wrapped everything in click-through licenses, so you couldn't just download it and install it using your distro's packaging system. This version seems like more of the same, or maybe even worse. I went to the java.net page linked to from the article, downloaded the file. It's a shell script, and when you run it, the first thing it does is print out a license and ask if you agree to it. Some of the contents of the license:

    • 3.1 Licensee may not duplicate Licensed Software other than for a single copy of Licensed Software for archival purposes only.
    • 3.3 Except as otherwise provided by law, Licensee may not modify or create derivative works of the Licensed Software, or reverse engineer, disassemble or decompile binary portions of the Licensed Software, or otherwise attempt to derive the source code from such portions.
    • 3.5 Licensee shall have no right to use the Licensed Software for productive or commercial use.
    • 6.1 This Agreement will commence on the date on which Licensee receives Licensed Software (the "Effective Date") and will expire twelve (12) months from the Effective Date, unless terminated earlier as provided herein.
    • 6.2 Either party may terminate this Agreement upon ten (10) days' written notice to the other party.

    So in other words, it's not open source under the Open Source Definition [opensource.org].

    I think it's great that Sun has GPL'd their implementation of java. Three cheers for Sun for doing that. But they've proved over and over again that any open-source project they control will have a closed development process, will ignore their user community, and will be a massive pain to install and work with. So the really good thing about Sun GPLing their version of java is that now, finally, we've gotten to the point where people other than Sun -- people who Get It about open source -- can take the ball and run with it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jmorris42 (1458) *

      > Some of the contents of the license:

      Yes Sun laywers are a bunch of dicks but remember that this is prerelease software. Normal releases od java don't have some of those nasty bits in the license and we can hope that the license will get improve as they continue the Open Source process with java.

      A few posts above I slag Java pretty hard, just trying to be fair. :)

    • that *is* sun java (Score:4, Informative)

      by sentientbrendan (316150) on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @01:45AM (#26129465)

      >apt-get install openjdk-6-jre openjdk-6-jdk icedtea-gcjwebplugin
      >Sun has always made it a royal pain to use their java
      You are criticizing sun java, but that *is* sun's Java implementation. The only part that isn't is the icedtea-gcjwebplugin.

      >For years they've always wrapped everything in click-through licenses, so you couldn't just download it and install it using your distro's packaging system.

      Huh?
      For years I've been able to download and install sun java through ubuntu. Before they rebranded it as "openjava" you could still download it. The ubuntu package manager would *pop up* that clickthrough license that you are talking about.

      >, it's not open source under the Open Source Definition

      Not being open source doesn't stop it from being used on Linux... Most production Linux systems have proprietary software on them, especially proprietary drivers and firmware. You probably have some on your box and don't even know it.

      For that matter, it's impossible to have a completely open source system because the hardware itself is not open source. Stopping at the software layer is totally arbitrary. All Linux users have *some* level of comfort with proprietary technology.

      For that matter, Sun controls Java's language definition, so the language itself isn't really open. If you want an open platform, use C++, Python, Ruby, Javascript or any other language that is community controlled or standards based. Java is really an awful language, so I don't understand what your holdup is. You need to use Java, but not Sun Java? Use Java or don't, but don't Use Java and try to do it in a stupid way that will never work properly

      People widely use Sun Java in production environments because the alternatives are buggy as hell. The "openjdk" you reference is actually just sun java repackaged, not an independent effort, but I used the older open source versions of java back in the day, and they were all awful and buggy. GNU Classpath in particular just does not implement much of the java libraries.

  • by StarHeart (27290) * on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @12:53AM (#26129119)

    It includes a plugin and javaws support. The two major things sun java 64bit has been lacking for years. It is still lacking the rim.cgi, but I have never had a need for it.

    The plugin needs some polish. It doesn't properly declare it's version. Which makes a kvm application I use fail, because it tries to check the version.

  • by mi (197448) <slashdot-2012@virtual-estates.net> on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @01:09AM (#26129233) Homepage

    Unlike Flash, Java source-code was perfectly open and available for years (it has even been GPL-ed for a while, but before that was still available). Why did anyone have to wait for Sun to release the 64-bit plugin instead of compiling one? A fairly small patch was required (long vs. size_t somewhere deep inside)...

    FreeBSD was providing Java [freshports.org] (with the plugin) for both i386 and amd64 for years now...

    What does the fact, that this is news, tell us about Linux developers? First they holler at Sun to release the source, that's already available for download under GPL. And then they still would not touch it, until Sun gets around to it... "Freedom to tinker" my behind.

  • webstart? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by asv108 (141455) <alex@@@phataudio...org> on Tuesday December 16, 2008 @01:22AM (#26129329) Homepage Journal
    Does anyone know if Sun now supports webstart on 64bit linux?

"And do you think (fop that I am) that I could be the Scarlet Pumpernickel?" -- Looney Tunes, The Scarlet Pumpernickel (1950, Chuck Jones)

Working...