On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Fernando Cassia <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/3/17, Damjan Jovanovic <[email protected]> wrote: > > Now what: > > 1. Ship our own builds of OpenJDK, in matching bitness. Do the licences > > (GPL for JVM, GPL-with-classpath-exception for class library) allow us > to? > > 2. Drop Windows as a platform, since it's the only affected platform > (*nix > > users usually install distro OpenJDK packages so 32 bit OpenJDK will be > > available for 32 bit AOO). We have no Win64 AOO. > > 3. Drop 32 bit versions of AOO and add Win64 support. > > 4. Or drop Java entirely and port our Java code to eg. .NET core, which > is > > liberally licensed and private copies of it can be shipped? > > > > Damjan > > Tempest in a teapot. You do know that Oracle isn't the only provider > of Java or OpenJDK, right? > > Options > 1. You can buiild your own 32-bit x86 binary based on OpenJDK sources. > 2. make AOO compile OK on 64 bit thus making AOO a 64-bit Windows app, > able to use any 64-bit JRE (Oracle JRE, IBM JRE, Azul's Zulu JRE) > 3. Have you asked Azul Systems if they can provide a 32-bit build? > 4. Compile the Java code in AOO as native with Java 9's AOT compiler? > http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/295 > > Just my $0.02 > FC > > As a bystander, I'm wondering just how alarming this news is to Apache OpenOffice. The builds are using Java 6 or 7, right? I'm still on 32-bit Linux for now but my default OpenJDK is 1.8. I can run AOO fine with it but must use 1.7 for building. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "Only the truth will save you now." -- Ensei Tankado, "Digital Fortress"
