Timeline for Why don't some open source libraries provide binaries?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 17, 2011 at 23:25 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | Yay religious war! I'll get the tar, you get the feathers? | |
| May 17, 2011 at 22:54 | comment | added | user8709 | tangential, true, but in a question that's already a bit of a Linux vs. Windows etc religious war, maybe one of the lesser crimes. BTW - I did +1 your answer as useful. | |
| May 17, 2011 at 22:40 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | @Steve I'm not disagreeing with you per se but I don't really see how the pros/cons of WOCA or WORA are relevant to this question. | |
| May 17, 2011 at 22:21 | comment | added | user8709 | One problem with write-once-run-anywhere is that the virtual machine is a program in its own right, from the point of view of the O/S. For example, most Windows firewalls allow you to grant/deny access to networks on an app-by-app basis. But most of them can't tell one Java app from another - they grant/deny access to the JVM, but if you have one Java app that acts as an internet server (Azureus, perhaps) then the firewall will not block any unknown rogue Java application from acting as a server. If there's a Java-specific solution, I'm an example of a Java user who doesn't know about it. | |
| May 17, 2011 at 21:37 | history | edited | Rein Henrichs | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 2 characters in body |
| May 17, 2011 at 21:30 | history | edited | Rein Henrichs | CC BY-SA 3.0 | deleted 11 characters in body; added 7 characters in body; added 43 characters in body; added 33 characters in body; added 21 characters in body |
| May 17, 2011 at 21:25 | history | edited | Rein Henrichs | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 276 characters in body; added 146 characters in body; added 116 characters in body; deleted 33 characters in body |
| May 17, 2011 at 21:20 | history | answered | Rein Henrichs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |