[api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
20 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Martin Dobiasch
Hi,

My extension needs to access the MidiSystem of Java.
But when it tries to access javax.sound.midi.MidiSystem my
Code stops executing without showing an exception

  Debug.showMessage("1");
  MidiSystem.getMidiDeviceInfo();
  Debug.showMessage("2");

No exception is caught. But Debug output only shows 1
Maybe this is related to the fact that I have to do the workaround
To get Java working on Mac
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ/Platform/Mac_OS_X
_10.6

(Btw it works fine on Windows)

Any help for a workaround appreciated

Thanks,
  Martin




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Martin Dobiasch
> Maybe this is related to the fact that I have to do the workaround
> To get Java working on Mac
>
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ/Platform/Mac_OS_X
_10.6
>

I've now tested it with OO 3.3 rc8 and still have the same problem (Java
setup works now fine)

I have the same problem when testing it with LibreOffice.
But it works using NeoOffice ...

Is there a LibreOffice mailing list where I can report this behaviour?
I didn't find one on the website where it seems like they want to hear about
problems like this

Martin




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jürgen Schmidt
In reply to this post by Martin Dobiasch
Hi Martin,

when i try to get a MidiSystem.getMidiDeviceInfo() from an addon on
MacOS i get an NoClassDefFoundError -> "Could not initialize class
com.sun.media.sound.Platform"

I assume you need the Java media framework installed on your Mac.

Juergen

On 12/22/10 3:44 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:

>> Maybe this is related to the fact that I have to do the workaround
>> To get Java working on Mac
>>
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ/Platform/Mac_OS_X
> _10.6
>>
>
> I've now tested it with OO 3.3 rc8 and still have the same problem (Java
> setup works now fine)
>
> I have the same problem when testing it with LibreOffice.
> But it works using NeoOffice ...
>
> Is there a LibreOffice mailing list where I can report this behaviour?
> I didn't find one on the website where it seems like they want to hear about
> problems like this
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jürgen Schmidt
mmh, probably it is more a problem with 32bit versus 64bit. Java inside
the office runs in 32bit mode and maybe this is the problem. But hey
that is wild guessing only at the moment :-(

Juergen

On 12/22/10 4:26 PM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> when i try to get a MidiSystem.getMidiDeviceInfo() from an addon on
> MacOS i get an NoClassDefFoundError -> "Could not initialize class
> com.sun.media.sound.Platform"
>
> I assume you need the Java media framework installed on your Mac.
>
> Juergen
>
> On 12/22/10 3:44 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:
>>> Maybe this is related to the fact that I have to do the workaround
>>> To get Java working on Mac
>>>
>> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/FAQ/Platform/Mac_OS_X
>> _10.6
>>>
>>
>> I've now tested it with OO 3.3 rc8 and still have the same problem (Java
>> setup works now fine)
>>
>> I have the same problem when testing it with LibreOffice.
>> But it works using NeoOffice ...
>>
>> Is there a LibreOffice mailing list where I can report this behaviour?
>> I didn't find one on the website where it seems like they want to hear about
>> problems like this
>>
>> Martin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>


--
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Jürgen Schmidt | Principal Software Engineer
Oracle Office GBU

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603

Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Rijnzathe 6, 3454PV De Meern, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Martin Dobiasch
Hi Juergen,

> mmh, probably it is more a problem with 32bit versus 64bit. Java inside
> the office runs in 32bit mode and maybe this is the problem. But hey
> that is wild guessing only at the moment :-(
It seems to be a 64bit cpu (Core 2 Duo) running a 32bit kernel (uname shows
i386).

> > I assume you need the Java media framework installed on your Mac.
Its installed as I've tested some other code on that Mac using the Midi API
of Sun-Java. For example the same extension works for NeoOffice.
Do you know where in the code I can find the java implementation? Maybe I
can dig into it and compare Libre/Open-Office with NeoOffice

> when i try to get a MidiSystem.getMidiDeviceInfo() from an addon on
> MacOS i get an NoClassDefFoundError -> "Could not initialize class
> com.sun.media.sound.Platform"
How do you get Exceptions? My code always terminates without an exception
The statement is in an try-catch Block with catch(Exception e) but no
Exception caught ... (but that's not really important for me)

Martin



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jürgen Schmidt
In reply to this post by Jürgen Schmidt
On 12/22/10 6:03 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:

> Hi Juergen,
>
>> mmh, probably it is more a problem with 32bit versus 64bit. Java inside
>> the office runs in 32bit mode and maybe this is the problem. But hey
>> that is wild guessing only at the moment :-(
> It seems to be a 64bit cpu (Core 2 Duo) running a 32bit kernel (uname shows
> i386).
>
>>> I assume you need the Java media framework installed on your Mac.
> Its installed as I've tested some other code on that Mac using the Midi API
> of Sun-Java. For example the same extension works for NeoOffice.
> Do you know where in the code I can find the java implementation? Maybe I
> can dig into it and compare Libre/Open-Office with NeoOffice
The UI of NeoOffice is completely Java based i assume they run native 64
bit. Anyway you can't simply compare NeoOffice with OpenOffice.org here.

Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
Java completely ;-)

>
>> when i try to get a MidiSystem.getMidiDeviceInfo() from an addon on
>> MacOS i get an NoClassDefFoundError -> "Could not initialize class
>> com.sun.media.sound.Platform"
> How do you get Exceptions? My code always terminates without an exception
> The statement is in an try-catch Block with catch(Exception e) but no
> Exception caught ... (but that's not really important for me)
catch(Throwable t)

Juergen

>
> Martin
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Martin Dobiasch
Hi Juergen,

> The UI of NeoOffice is completely Java based i assume they run native 64
> bit. Anyway you can't simply compare NeoOffice with OpenOffice.org here.
>
> Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
> Java completely ;-)

Okay. So I'll have to do some test to find out if there are some odd
settings for the java environment for extensions. (I think there are some
because AWT and Swing seem to have the same problem too)

Martin




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[api-dev] LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Rony G. Flatscher
In reply to this post by Jürgen Schmidt

On 22.12.2010 19:13, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 12/22/10 6:03 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:
>  
... cut ...

>> Its installed as I've tested some other code on that Mac using the
>> Midi API
>> of Sun-Java. For example the same extension works for NeoOffice.
>> Do you know where in the code I can find the java implementation? Maybe I
>> can dig into it and compare Libre/Open-Office with NeoOffice
>>    
> The UI of NeoOffice is completely Java based i assume they run native 64
> bit. Anyway you can't simply compare NeoOffice with OpenOffice.org here.
>
> Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
> Java completely ;-)
>  
Why would they want to cripple OOo that badly ?

Do you happen to know the rationale by any chance?
Maybe the question rephrased to make it more on-track: would there be a
problem with Java in OOo, such that removing Java would solve a problem?
And if so, what would it be?

---rony


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jan Holst Jensen
On 2010-12-23 17:30, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:

> On 22.12.2010 19:13, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 12/22/10 6:03 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:
>>
> ... cut ...
>>> Its installed as I've tested some other code on that Mac using the
>>> Midi API
>>> of Sun-Java. For example the same extension works for NeoOffice.
>>> Do you know where in the code I can find the java implementation? Maybe I
>>> can dig into it and compare Libre/Open-Office with NeoOffice
>>>
>> The UI of NeoOffice is completely Java based i assume they run native 64
>> bit. Anyway you can't simply compare NeoOffice with OpenOffice.org here.
>>
>> Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
>> Java completely ;-)
>>
> Why would they want to cripple OOo that badly ?
>
> Do you happen to know the rationale by any chance?
> Maybe the question rephrased to make it more on-track: would there be a
> problem with Java in OOo, such that removing Java would solve a problem?
> And if so, what would it be?

Most of OOo is written in C++ so it won't be badly crippled if Java is
removed from the product. I have used OOo without Java on a machine and
almost all of OOo works just fine without Java.

As far as I can understand LibreOffice is just trying to minimize the
_dependency_ on Java. Developers will still be able to write extensions
in Java but the core (of LibreOffice) won't ideally require a Java
runtime anymore. As for the reasons: It would potentially minimize
memory usage and some are probably concerned about the Oracle <> Google
debacle:

http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@.../msg02492.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@.../msg02612.html

Cheers
-- Jan Holst Jensen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Rony G. Flatscher

On 23.12.2010 17:49, Jan Holst Jensen wrote:

> On 2010-12-23 17:30, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>> On 22.12.2010 19:13, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> On 12/22/10 6:03 PM, Martin Dobiasch wrote:
>>>
>> ... cut ...
>>>> Its installed as I've tested some other code on that Mac using the
>>>> Midi API
>>>> of Sun-Java. For example the same extension works for NeoOffice.
>>>> Do you know where in the code I can find the java implementation?
>>>> Maybe I
>>>> can dig into it and compare Libre/Open-Office with NeoOffice
>>>>
>>> The UI of NeoOffice is completely Java based i assume they run
>>> native 64
>>> bit. Anyway you can't simply compare NeoOffice with OpenOffice.org
>>> here.
>>>
>>> Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
>>> Java completely ;-)
>>>
>> Why would they want to cripple OOo that badly ?
>>
>> Do you happen to know the rationale by any chance?
>> Maybe the question rephrased to make it more on-track: would there be a
>> problem with Java in OOo, such that removing Java would solve a problem?
>> And if so, what would it be?
>
> Most of OOo is written in C++ so it won't be badly crippled if Java is
> removed from the product. I have used OOo without Java on a machine
> and almost all of OOo works just fine without Java.
That's the point: not all of OOo is written in C++ anymore, there are
quite important subsystems written in Java.

One premiere example is the scripting subsystem, which makes JavaScript,
BeanShell, ooRexx and others available to OOo. Removing Java removes all
these options and renders programs written in these languages useless.

Another premiere example is the Java-API-interface to the entire OOo.
Removing Java removes the ability to use OOo from Java and to deploy all
Java applications that use OOo.

Therefore the conclusion, that removing Java from OOo yields OOo to be
badly crippled.

> As far as I can understand LibreOffice is just trying to minimize the
> _dependency_ on Java. Developers will still be able to write
> extensions in Java but the core (of LibreOffice) won't ideally require
> a Java runtime anymore.
It removes the ability for Java programmers to use LO and it removes the
ability to script LO with the scripting languages added since OOo 2.0.

> As for the reasons: It would potentially minimize memory usage and
> some are probably concerned about the Oracle <> Google debacle:
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@.../msg02492.html
> http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@.../msg02612.html
I cannot see why this has anything to do with LO.

---rony



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Konstantin Tokarev

> That's the point: not all of OOo is written in C++ anymore, there are
> quite important subsystems written in Java.
>
> One premiere example is the scripting subsystem, which makes JavaScript,
> BeanShell, ooRexx and others available to OOo. Removing Java removes all
> these options and renders programs written in these languages useless.
>
> Another premiere example is the Java-API-interface to the entire OOo.
> Removing Java removes the ability to use OOo from Java and to deploy all
> Java applications that use OOo.
>
> Therefore the conclusion, that removing Java from OOo yields OOo to be
> badly crippled.
>

So people who need these features won't use LO. Where is the problem?

--
Regards,
Konstantin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jan Holst Jensen
In reply to this post by Rony G. Flatscher
On 2010-12-24 10:57, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:

> On 23.12.2010 17:49, Jan Holst Jensen wrote:
>> On 2010-12-23 17:30, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>>> On 22.12.2010 19:13, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don't expect a fix form LibO they work more in the direction to remove
>>>> Java completely ;-)
>>>>
>>> Why would they want to cripple OOo that badly ?
>>>
>>> Do you happen to know the rationale by any chance?
>>> Maybe the question rephrased to make it more on-track: would there be a
>>> problem with Java in OOo, such that removing Java would solve a problem?
>>> And if so, what would it be?
>> Most of OOo is written in C++ so it won't be badly crippled if Java is
>> removed from the product. I have used OOo without Java on a machine
>> and almost all of OOo works just fine without Java.
> That's the point: not all of OOo is written in C++ anymore, there are
> quite important subsystems written in Java.
>
> One premiere example is the scripting subsystem, which makes JavaScript,
> BeanShell, ooRexx and others available to OOo. Removing Java removes all
> these options and renders programs written in these languages useless.
>
> Another premiere example is the Java-API-interface to the entire OOo.
> Removing Java removes the ability to use OOo from Java and to deploy all
> Java applications that use OOo.
>
> Therefore the conclusion, that removing Java from OOo yields OOo to be
> badly crippled.
>

That LibreOffice is going to remove the abillity to create Java
extensions is the opposite of what I have understood and I believe that
I tried to convey that. I may be totally wrong - I am not affiliated in
any way with neither OpenOffice.org nor LibreOffice. I am just trying to
pass on what I have been able to read from the various mailing lists.

>> As far as I can understand LibreOffice is just trying to minimize the
>> _dependency_ on Java. Developers will still be able to write
>> extensions in Java but the core (of LibreOffice) won't ideally require
>> a Java runtime anymore.
> It removes the ability for Java programmers to use LO and it removes the
> ability to script LO with the scripting languages added since OOo 2.0.
>

Well, if that turns out to be the case then don't use LibreOffice - as
Konstantin has just remarked. I would certainly place my bets that OOo
does _not_ remove Java.

>> As for the reasons: It would potentially minimize memory usage and
>> some are probably concerned about the Oracle<>  Google debacle:
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@.../msg02492.html
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@.../msg02612.html
> I cannot see why this has anything to do with LO.

Well, the links reference a discussion about removing Java dependencies
from LibreOffice. But you're absolutely right. This doesn't have much to
do with LibreOffice since this is an OpenOffice.org mailing list ;-).
Perhaps your concerns about LibreOffice would be better adressed at
http://www.documentfoundation.org/contribution/#lists ?

Cheers
-- Jan Holst Jensen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Rony G. Flatscher
In reply to this post by Konstantin Tokarev
On 24.12.2010 11:20, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:

>> That's the point: not all of OOo is written in C++ anymore, there are
>> quite important subsystems written in Java.
>>
>> One premiere example is the scripting subsystem, which makes JavaScript,
>> BeanShell, ooRexx and others available to OOo. Removing Java removes all
>> these options and renders programs written in these languages useless.
>>
>> Another premiere example is the Java-API-interface to the entire OOo.
>> Removing Java removes the ability to use OOo from Java and to deploy all
>> Java applications that use OOo.
>>
>> Therefore the conclusion, that removing Java from OOo yields OOo to be
>> badly crippled.
>>
>>    
> So people who need these features won't use LO. Where is the problem?
>  
There is no problem, unless the LO people found a problem in the Java
support for OOo and are therefore removing it in their distribution. And
if that is the case I would like to know the reasons. Currently it seems
that there are no technical reasons for this move/decision.

---rony


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Andreas Säger
In reply to this post by Rony G. Flatscher
Am 24.12.2010 10:57, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
> One premiere example is the scripting subsystem, which makes JavaScript,
> BeanShell, ooRexx and others available to OOo. Removing Java removes all
> these options and renders programs written in these languages useless.
>

Only Tools>Macros>Run... raises a misleading error message about missing
Java. Basic and Python keep on working as usual from that dialog.
Using Tools>Macros>Organize>Basic|Python avoids the error message.
The script providers don't need to be written in Java.
A modified Python script provider written in Python which helps to embed
Python in documents:
http://hermione.s41.xrea.com/pukiwiki/index.php?OOobbs2%2F194

The biggest chunk of Java might be the Base component with all the
useless/misleading Java wizards and the embedded Java-HSQLDB.
It could be removed all together in favour of a much simpler and more
functional database connectivity like it used to be in version 1.x.
(with less bugs and working as specified, of course).

The "Access equivalent" with a database in a single file failed.
Even the "simple users" do understand the concept of a registered
database from where to fetch mail merge addresses. But even advanced
users become extremely irritated by the fact that this configuration
involves a separate "Base document", a Calc document (in most cases),
and one or two Writer documents.
Some of the wizards under File>Wizard>... are really useful but
nevertheless replaceable with something better.

Merry Christmas,
Andreas


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jürgen Schmidt
On 12/24/10 4:48 PM, Andreas Säger wrote:

> Am 24.12.2010 10:57, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>> One premiere example is the scripting subsystem, which makes JavaScript,
>> BeanShell, ooRexx and others available to OOo. Removing Java removes all
>> these options and renders programs written in these languages useless.
>>
>
> Only Tools>Macros>Run... raises a misleading error message about missing
> Java. Basic and Python keep on working as usual from that dialog.
> Using Tools>Macros>Organize>Basic|Python avoids the error message.
> The script providers don't need to be written in Java.
> A modified Python script provider written in Python which helps to embed
> Python in documents:
> http://hermione.s41.xrea.com/pukiwiki/index.php?OOobbs2%2F194
>
> The biggest chunk of Java might be the Base component with all the
> useless/misleading Java wizards and the embedded Java-HSQLDB.
> It could be removed all together in favour of a much simpler and more
> functional database connectivity like it used to be in version 1.x.
> (with less bugs and working as specified, of course).
>
> The "Access equivalent" with a database in a single file failed.
> Even the "simple users" do understand the concept of a registered
> database from where to fetch mail merge addresses. But even advanced
> users become extremely irritated by the fact that this configuration
> involves a separate "Base document", a Calc document (in most cases),
> and one or two Writer documents.
> Some of the wizards under File>Wizard>... are really useful but
> nevertheless replaceable with something better.

can we please stop this discussion on this mailing list here. It is
somewhat off topic here and should be discussed somewhere else. Maybe
[hidden email] or [hidden email].

At the moment there is indeed no real technical reason to remove Java.
Ok on Mac OS there exists some problems (only a few use cases) but i
hope that this can be solved in the future.

Sorry that i have put this sentence with removing Java in LibO in the
game. I don't really want to talk about LibO here.

Juergen


>
> Merry Christmas,
> Andreas
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


--
Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
Jürgen Schmidt | Principal Software Engineer
Oracle Office GBU

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603

Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Rijnzathe 6, 3454PV De Meern, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Andreas Säger
Am 27.12.2010 09:22, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> At the moment there is indeed no real technical reason to remove Java.
> Ok on Mac OS there exists some problems (only a few use cases) but i
> hope that this can be solved in the future.
>

Technical reasons:
More dependencies than necessary.
Compare the cold start times with and without Java.

> Sorry that i have put this sentence with removing Java in LibO in the
> game.

It was Rony who asked a reasonable question in the subject line. From my
point of view it would be possible to remove the Java dependencies from
the built-in features once you dropped the embedded HSQLDB which proves
to be failing since 5 years by now.
I do understand that Java is a holy cow for Oracle employees but you
will not stop the discussion about it.

Good Slide! (as we say in German),
Andreas Säger


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jürgen Schmidt
On 12/27/10 11:24 AM, Andreas Säger wrote:

> Am 27.12.2010 09:22, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>> At the moment there is indeed no real technical reason to remove Java.
>> Ok on Mac OS there exists some problems (only a few use cases) but i
>> hope that this can be solved in the future.
>>
>
> Technical reasons:
> More dependencies than necessary.
> Compare the cold start times with and without Java.
>
>> Sorry that i have put this sentence with removing Java in LibO in the
>> game.
>
> It was Rony who asked a reasonable question in the subject line. From my
> point of view it would be possible to remove the Java dependencies from
> the built-in features once you dropped the embedded HSQLDB which proves
> to be failing since 5 years by now.
as far as i know Java is not started directly, only if some features are
used that depends on Java. But that is not the case from the beginning.
Related to the DB features that might be true i don't know because i
don't really use it.

> I do understand that Java is a holy cow for Oracle employees but you
> will not stop the discussion about it.
;-) i don't think so, but Java is besides Python the only reliable way
to add new components as extensions. Well i talk not about macros etc.

Juergen


>
> Good Slide! (as we say in German),
> Andreas Säger
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Andreas Säger
Am 27.12.2010 12:22, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

>> I do understand that Java is a holy cow for Oracle employees but you
>> will not stop the discussion about it.
> ;-) i don't think so, but Java is besides Python the only reliable way
> to add new components as extensions. Well i talk not about macros etc.
>
> Juergen

Juergen,
Of course, Java is *the* language for optional new components.

I refered to the built-in set of features, some of which rely on Java
since the very first version (menu:File>Wizards>...), some of which are
not desirable in my honest opinion (embedded HSQLDB and misleading
database wizards).

A user installs the software from its home page and gets error messages
about Java missing when calling some wizard.
A user installs the software from its home page, together with a bundle
of Java by default, although he has Java installed already, possibly
even a more recent one which gets updated without OOo taking any advantage.
Without Java, menu:Tools>Macros>Run... raises an error suggesting that
you can not run any macros without JRE, which is untrue as far as Basic
and Python are concerned.

Andreas


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Jürgen Schmidt
On 12/27/10 1:00 PM, Andreas Säger wrote:

> Am 27.12.2010 12:22, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>
>>> I do understand that Java is a holy cow for Oracle employees but you
>>> will not stop the discussion about it.
>> ;-) i don't think so, but Java is besides Python the only reliable way
>> to add new components as extensions. Well i talk not about macros etc.
>>
>> Juergen
>
> Juergen,
> Of course, Java is *the* language for optional new components.
>
> I refered to the built-in set of features, some of which rely on Java
> since the very first version (menu:File>Wizards>...), some of which are
> not desirable in my honest opinion (embedded HSQLDB and misleading
> database wizards).
>
> A user installs the software from its home page and gets error messages
> about Java missing when calling some wizard.
i agree that in this case the menu items should be disabled or simply
not visible. But if invisible we would have the problem that some users
would never find this features ... Seems to be an UX problem

> A user installs the software from its home page, together with a bundle
> of Java by default, although he has Java installed already, possibly
> even a more recent one which gets updated without OOo taking any advantage.
> Without Java, menu:Tools>Macros>Run... raises an error suggesting that
> you can not run any macros without JRE, which is untrue as far as Basic
> and Python are concerned.
>
i agree again and that is a bug for me.

Juergen


> Andreas
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[api-dev] Re: LO removing Java, why would they want to? (Re: [api-dev] Java-Midi not working on Mac?

Andreas Säger
Am 27.12.2010 13:41, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:

> On 12/27/10 1:00 PM, Andreas Säger wrote:
>
>> A user installs the software from its home page, together with a bundle
>> of Java by default, although he has Java installed already, possibly
>> even a more recent one which gets updated without OOo taking any advantage.
>> Without Java, menu:Tools>Macros>Run... raises an error suggesting that
>> you can not run any macros without JRE, which is untrue as far as Basic
>> and Python are concerned.
>>
> i agree again and that is a bug for me.
>

Hi Jürgen,

The issue is http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=86541 which
has been rejected as invalid. In fact it is still an issue.
Disable Java.
Tools>Macros>Run... gives the error message but as a matter of fact you
can run Basic and Python with Java disabled.
No such error message when you follow:
Tools>Macros>Organize>Basic|Python... button [Run]

Andreas


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]