Have CentOS OpenJDK packages passed TCK compliance testing?
Red Hat provides OpenJDK binary distributions that have passed TCK compliance testing, as documented in their OpenJDK Life Cycle and Support Policy.
The equivalent CentOS OpenJDK rpm packages carry the same version string, and appear to behave in exactly the same manner as their RHEL counterparts. The contents, however, are slightly different. My assumption is that the CentOS builds use the same upstream source version as Red Hat, with differences coming from the system libraries or build environment.
This leaves me with some questions.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing? If not, how reasonable is it to assume that the CentOS OpenJDK is of known quality? (I suppose there is the assurance that comes from using something as widely used as CentOS.)
For what it's worth - My customer understands that, if they really care about TCK, then perhaps they should be paying for Red Hat, or looking to an alternative like Azul. I'm trying to guide an informed decision.
java redhat-openjdk
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
add a comment |
Red Hat provides OpenJDK binary distributions that have passed TCK compliance testing, as documented in their OpenJDK Life Cycle and Support Policy.
The equivalent CentOS OpenJDK rpm packages carry the same version string, and appear to behave in exactly the same manner as their RHEL counterparts. The contents, however, are slightly different. My assumption is that the CentOS builds use the same upstream source version as Red Hat, with differences coming from the system libraries or build environment.
This leaves me with some questions.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing? If not, how reasonable is it to assume that the CentOS OpenJDK is of known quality? (I suppose there is the assurance that comes from using something as widely used as CentOS.)
For what it's worth - My customer understands that, if they really care about TCK, then perhaps they should be paying for Red Hat, or looking to an alternative like Azul. I'm trying to guide an informed decision.
java redhat-openjdk
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
Is this question material for serverfault, perhaps?
– Alfabravo
Nov 26 '18 at 17:15
add a comment |
Red Hat provides OpenJDK binary distributions that have passed TCK compliance testing, as documented in their OpenJDK Life Cycle and Support Policy.
The equivalent CentOS OpenJDK rpm packages carry the same version string, and appear to behave in exactly the same manner as their RHEL counterparts. The contents, however, are slightly different. My assumption is that the CentOS builds use the same upstream source version as Red Hat, with differences coming from the system libraries or build environment.
This leaves me with some questions.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing? If not, how reasonable is it to assume that the CentOS OpenJDK is of known quality? (I suppose there is the assurance that comes from using something as widely used as CentOS.)
For what it's worth - My customer understands that, if they really care about TCK, then perhaps they should be paying for Red Hat, or looking to an alternative like Azul. I'm trying to guide an informed decision.
java redhat-openjdk
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
Red Hat provides OpenJDK binary distributions that have passed TCK compliance testing, as documented in their OpenJDK Life Cycle and Support Policy.
The equivalent CentOS OpenJDK rpm packages carry the same version string, and appear to behave in exactly the same manner as their RHEL counterparts. The contents, however, are slightly different. My assumption is that the CentOS builds use the same upstream source version as Red Hat, with differences coming from the system libraries or build environment.
This leaves me with some questions.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing? If not, how reasonable is it to assume that the CentOS OpenJDK is of known quality? (I suppose there is the assurance that comes from using something as widely used as CentOS.)
For what it's worth - My customer understands that, if they really care about TCK, then perhaps they should be paying for Red Hat, or looking to an alternative like Azul. I'm trying to guide an informed decision.
java redhat-openjdk
java redhat-openjdk
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
asked Nov 26 '18 at 17:12
Paul SPaul S
734
734
Is this question material for serverfault, perhaps?
– Alfabravo
Nov 26 '18 at 17:15
add a comment |
Is this question material for serverfault, perhaps?
– Alfabravo
Nov 26 '18 at 17:15
Is this question material for serverfault, perhaps?
– Alfabravo
Nov 26 '18 at 17:15
Is this question material for serverfault, perhaps?
– Alfabravo
Nov 26 '18 at 17:15
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The Java TCK operates at a binary level. Only binaries can pass/fail the TCK. As far as the TCK is concerned you can build the same exact sources twice, using identical libraries, compiler flags and so on and each binary needs to be identified separately as having passed the TCK.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing?
Red Hat - who I work for - publicly claim their binaries are TCK compliant. I dont know of anyone who tests or claims that for CentOS. By default, we should assume that they have not passed the TCK.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53485992%2fhave-centos-openjdk-packages-passed-tck-compliance-testing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The Java TCK operates at a binary level. Only binaries can pass/fail the TCK. As far as the TCK is concerned you can build the same exact sources twice, using identical libraries, compiler flags and so on and each binary needs to be identified separately as having passed the TCK.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing?
Red Hat - who I work for - publicly claim their binaries are TCK compliant. I dont know of anyone who tests or claims that for CentOS. By default, we should assume that they have not passed the TCK.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
add a comment |
The Java TCK operates at a binary level. Only binaries can pass/fail the TCK. As far as the TCK is concerned you can build the same exact sources twice, using identical libraries, compiler flags and so on and each binary needs to be identified separately as having passed the TCK.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing?
Red Hat - who I work for - publicly claim their binaries are TCK compliant. I dont know of anyone who tests or claims that for CentOS. By default, we should assume that they have not passed the TCK.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
add a comment |
The Java TCK operates at a binary level. Only binaries can pass/fail the TCK. As far as the TCK is concerned you can build the same exact sources twice, using identical libraries, compiler flags and so on and each binary needs to be identified separately as having passed the TCK.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing?
Red Hat - who I work for - publicly claim their binaries are TCK compliant. I dont know of anyone who tests or claims that for CentOS. By default, we should assume that they have not passed the TCK.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
The Java TCK operates at a binary level. Only binaries can pass/fail the TCK. As far as the TCK is concerned you can build the same exact sources twice, using identical libraries, compiler flags and so on and each binary needs to be identified separately as having passed the TCK.
Are the CentOS OpenJDK builds put through TCK compliance testing?
Red Hat - who I work for - publicly claim their binaries are TCK compliant. I dont know of anyone who tests or claims that for CentOS. By default, we should assume that they have not passed the TCK.
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
answered Nov 26 '18 at 17:35
omajidomajid
3,5571630
3,5571630
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
add a comment |
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
Thanks! This does makes sense, and matches up with what I'd expect. For what it's worth, I do think this builds a good argument for using a certified build (like Red Hat or Azul) if you're building a commercial product but don't wish to enter into an Oracle support contract.
– Paul S
Nov 26 '18 at 19:16
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53485992%2fhave-centos-openjdk-packages-passed-tck-compliance-testing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Is this question material for serverfault, perhaps?
– Alfabravo
Nov 26 '18 at 17:15