Java problem

[Les Mikesell]

Lamar Owen wrote:

>> I'd just like some truth-in-advertising here.  Don't call it java until
>> it is - and realize it is just as damaging as if would be if someone
>> replaced your /bin/sh with an incompatible replacement.
> 
> LOL.
> 
> Having a moderately complex (2.9MB .war) java applet/servlet combo in 
> production here, I laugh at this.  Sun's Java isn't even compatible with 
> itself!  (JRE 1.4 -> 1.5 broke our app; 1.5->1.6 broke our app; etc)
> 
> So, Les, just what is 'java'?  Which version?

This isn't something you have to guess about.  There is a compatibility 
test.

> Hrmph, I've seen numerous Java apps and applets that work fine on a 1.4 JRE (I 
> even have one app, quite old, that requires a 1.3 JRE) and will not even 
> start with 1.5, much less 1.6 or 1.7.
> 
> So, again, what IS 'Java' and how does one measure compatibility?

There are different versions with different tests.  Sun is the authority 
on this unless that have given that up recently.  The fact that this 
isn't clear shows just how badly the fake versions have damaged the name.

> Oh, and just because you have a 'compatible' /bin/sh doesn't mean your shell 
> scripts will run.  Shell script compatibility depends upon having the same 
> set of shell library commands available; this can vary even between one 
> Fedora 8 install and another one.  So /bin/sh compatibility is a strawman, as 
> 100% shell script compatibility doesn't exist (just try to run an old .shar 
> that needs uudecode on a modern Linux).

That's a different - and solvable - issue.  If a replacement shell did 
something different internally, like removing quotes before expanding 
wildcards you'd get the kind of damage that an incompatible java 
interpreter can do.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com