Is there something we can do about Java?

[Scott Ritchie]

I've run into a few applications that simply assume Java is installed. 
They die horribly with a "javaw" not found.

My first inclination is to just pop up a message explaining what went 
wrong and how to fix it, with a clickable link to go Sun's Java download 
page.

This struck me as similar to the Gecko situation.  In principle, we 
could have a wine-java package containing Sun's binaries and then just 
install them automatically when they're on the system, referring the 
user to the website otherwise.

Distributions would then need to make these packages (just like 
wine-gecko), and also get separate permission from Sun.  This strikes me 
as rather feasible - Ubuntu already ships Sun's Java in its parter 
repository - however we'd need to work out how it would work technically 
here first.  Ideally, Sun's installer wouldn't need to be modified.

Thanks,
Scott Ritchie

[Austin English]

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Scott Ritchie  wrote:
> I've run into a few applications that simply assume Java is installed. They
> die horribly with a "javaw" not found.
>
> My first inclination is to just pop up a message explaining what went wrong
> and how to fix it, with a clickable link to go Sun's Java download page.
>
> This struck me as similar to the Gecko situation.  In principle, we could
> have a wine-java package containing Sun's binaries and then just install
> them automatically when they're on the system, referring the user to the
> website otherwise.
>
> Distributions would then need to make these packages (just like wine-gecko),
> and also get separate permission from Sun.  This strikes me as rather
> feasible - Ubuntu already ships Sun's Java in its parter repository -
> however we'd need to work out how it would work technically here first.
>  Ideally, Sun's installer wouldn't need to be modified.

How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?

[Gert van den Berg]

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 21:49, Austin English  wrote:
> How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?

MS Java used to be bundled with (some versions of) Windows? (If an
application was released requireing XP SP1 before the release of SP1a,
its developer might have assumed that Windows will include the Java
VM) (With IE completely removable under Win 7, it might be even more
similar...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine#Windows_XP

Gert

Fwd: Is there something we can do about Java?

[Gert van den Berg]

Correct from address...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gert van den Berg
Date: Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 22:34
Subject: Re: Is there something we can do about Java?

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 21:49, Austin English  wrote:
> How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?

MS Java used to be bundled with (some versions of) Windows? (If an
application was released requireing XP SP1 before the release of SP1a,
its developer might have assumed that Windows will include the Java
VM) (With IE completely removable under Win 7, it might be even more
similar...)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine#Windows_XP

Gert

[Juan Lang]

> > How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?
>
> MS Java used to be bundled with (some versions of) Windows? (If an
> application was released requireing XP SP1 before the release of SP1a,
> its developer might have assumed that Windows will include the Java
> VM) (With IE completely removable under Win 7, it might be even more
> similar...)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Java_Virtual_Machine#Windows_XP

This is different from what Scott reported.  The MS Java VM only
allows one to run Java applets within IE, not to run applications from
the command line.  The latter requires javaw to exist and be in the
path, which Sun's JDK/JVM will do, but not MS's.

Frankly, applications that assume Java is installed are just broken.
--Juan

[James McKenzie]

Juan Lang wrote:
> > > How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?

It is not.  Thus we should NOT include Java in the package.  We should
have a Wiki article just like these do on how to install and run.
> Frankly, applications that assume Java is installed are just broken.

They are broken and not smart enough to figure out that Java does not
exist and popup the correct error.

BTW, where I work, Java applications are given priority over c/C++
ones.  Why?  Write once, run anywhere and this has to apply as we may
move from Windows(something) to RHEL to Solaris.

James McKenzie

[Ben Klein]

On 10 March 2010 12:19, James McKenzie  wrote:
> Juan Lang wrote:
> > > > How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?
>
> It is not.  Thus we should NOT include Java in the package.  We should
> have a Wiki article just like these do on how to install and run.
> > Frankly, applications that assume Java is installed are just broken.
>
> They are broken and not smart enough to figure out that Java does not
> exist and popup the correct error.
>
> BTW, where I work, Java applications are given priority over c/C++
> ones.  Why?  Write once, run anywhere and this has to apply as we may
> move from Windows(something) to RHEL to Solaris.
>
> James McKenzie

I won't tell you about the Java (esp swing) apps I've seen that hit
NPE on *nix but work fine on Windows ...

Of course, it turned out to be a case of fine, vintage Doin' It
Wrong(TM). The one I recall from my Uni days of Java was a
networking/socket assumption that shouldn't have been made.

[James McKenzie]

Ben Klein wrote:
> On 10 March 2010 12:19, James McKenzie  wrote:
> > Juan Lang wrote:
> > > > > How is this different from dotnet20/mfc42/etc.?
> >
> > It is not.  Thus we should NOT include Java in the package.  We should
> > have a Wiki article just like these do on how to install and run.
> > > Frankly, applications that assume Java is installed are just broken.
> >
> > They are broken and not smart enough to figure out that Java does not
> > exist and popup the correct error.
> >
> > BTW, where I work, Java applications are given priority over c/C++
> > ones.  Why?  Write once, run anywhere and this has to apply as we may
> > move from Windows(something) to RHEL to Solaris.
> >
> > James McKenzie
>
> I won't tell you about the Java (esp swing) apps I've seen that hit
> NPE on *nix but work fine on Windows ...
>
> Of course, it turned out to be a case of fine, vintage Doin' It
> Wrong(TM). The one I recall from my Uni days of Java was a
> networking/socket assumption that shouldn't have been made.

Bingo.  Good code does not make assumptions, but checks for presence and
gives an appropriate error when whatever is not found.

A good example of problems recently encountered is the GL 'X' mess.  It
would be nice if these were a lot less cryptic.

James McKenzie

[David Gerard]

On 10 March 2010 02:31, James McKenzie  wrote:
> Ben Klein wrote:
> > I won't tell you about the Java (esp swing) apps I've seen that hit
> > NPE on *nix but work fine on Windows ...
> Bingo.  Good code does not make assumptions, but checks for presence and
> gives an appropriate error when whatever is not found.

We are of course talking about programming on Windows ...

The question is not "is it broken?" The question is "are there real
apps that work on Windows, for whatever value of 'works,' that don't
work in Wine?"

i.e. the apps that fail stupidly in Wine without Java, what do they
actually do on Windows without Java?

- d.

[James McKenzie]

David Gerard wrote:
[Trim monster activated to shorten message to relative portions.]
> We are of course talking about programming on Windows ...
> The question is not "is it broken?" The question is "are there real
> apps that work on Windows, for whatever value of 'works,' that don't
> work in Wine?"
>
> i.e. the apps that fail stupidly in Wine without Java, what do they
> actually do on Windows without Java?

Good thoughts that need to be researched.

Wasn't a while ago that Windows did not come with any version of Java
until C# came along...

James McKenzie

[Roderick Colenbrander]

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Scott Ritchie  wrote:
> I've run into a few applications that simply assume Java is installed. They
> die horribly with a "javaw" not found.
>
> My first inclination is to just pop up a message explaining what went wrong
> and how to fix it, with a clickable link to go Sun's Java download page.
>
> This struck me as similar to the Gecko situation.  In principle, we could
> have a wine-java package containing Sun's binaries and then just install
> them automatically when they're on the system, referring the user to the
> website otherwise.
>
> Distributions would then need to make these packages (just like wine-gecko),
> and also get separate permission from Sun.  This strikes me as rather
> feasible - Ubuntu already ships Sun's Java in its parter repository -
> however we'd need to work out how it would work technically here first.
>  Ideally, Sun's installer wouldn't need to be modified.
>
> Thanks,
> Scott Ritchie

Like this there are dozens of other apps which make assumptions about
Visual C++ runtimes, MFC and other libraries. I don't think this
belongs in Wine but is to be solved by things like winetricks. It
might make sense to launch wine from a script (this script would be
packaged with Wine) and which upon failure could use winetricks to
install the missing dependency.

Roderick

[Ben Klein]

On 10 March 2010 06:50, Roderick Colenbrander  wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Scott Ritchie  wrote:
> > I've run into a few applications that simply assume Java is installed. They
> > die horribly with a "javaw" not found.
> >
> > My first inclination is to just pop up a message explaining what went wrong
> > and how to fix it, with a clickable link to go Sun's Java download page.
> >
> > This struck me as similar to the Gecko situation.  In principle, we could
> > have a wine-java package containing Sun's binaries and then just install
> > them automatically when they're on the system, referring the user to the
> > website otherwise.
> >
> > Distributions would then need to make these packages (just like wine-gecko),
> > and also get separate permission from Sun.  This strikes me as rather
> > feasible - Ubuntu already ships Sun's Java in its parter repository -
> > however we'd need to work out how it would work technically here first.
> >  Ideally, Sun's installer wouldn't need to be modified.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Scott Ritchie
>
> Like this there are dozens of other apps which make assumptions about
> Visual C++ runtimes, MFC and other libraries. I don't think this
> belongs in Wine but is to be solved by things like winetricks. It
> might make sense to launch wine from a script (this script would be
> packaged with Wine) and which upon failure could use winetricks to
> install the missing dependency.

Detecting apps that fail due to missing javaw command doesn't seem
like an elegant solution to me.

Just wondering, would the OpenJDK JRE be easier to manage in terms of
licenses than Sun's installer? Doesn't Java take a long time to
install?