Where's my Derby?
in [Java Programming]
|
Prev: how to record screen acrtions programatically?
Next: Build A Home Internet Business For Extra Income Stream
From: Tom Anderson on 4 Apr 2010 20:02 On Sat, 3 Apr 2010, Lew wrote: > Tom Anderson wrote: >> Derby aka JavaDB is included in JDK 1.6, right? So what's happening here: >> >> $ java -version >> java version "1.6.0_16" >> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_16-b01) >> Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 14.2-b01, mixed mode, sharing) >> $ javap org.apache.derby.jdbc.EmbeddedDriver >> ERROR:Could not find org.apache.derby.jdbc.EmbeddedDriver > > What's happening there is that you didn't include Derby in the > classpath. I agree with this. > I have Derby, which came with the 1.6.0_18 download but had also come > with my earlier 1.6 downloads, and get the same exact result from that > command that you do. OTOH, when I command > > $ javap -classpath /opt/java/java/db/lib/derby.jar \ > org.apache.derby.jdbc.EmbeddedDriver > > I get back: > > public class org.apache.derby.jdbc.EmbeddedDriver extends java.lang.Object > implements java.sql.Driver{ > public org.apache.derby.jdbc.EmbeddedDriver(); > public boolean acceptsURL(java.lang.String) throws > java.sql.SQLException; > public java.sql.Connection connect(java.lang.String, > java.util.Properties) throws java.sql.SQLException; > public java.sql.DriverPropertyInfo[] getPropertyInfo(java.lang.String, > java.util.Properties) throws java.sql.SQLException; > public int getMajorVersion(); > public int getMinorVersion(); > public boolean jdbcCompliant(); > static void boot(); > static {}; > } So far so good. > Ergo I conclude you have Derby, too, and that it came with your JDK download. Well, no. You can conclude that the results i posted do not show Derby is absent. But unless i can reproduce the commands that worked for you, you can't conclude that it's present! >> Am i [sic] looking for the wrong driver class? Or do i [sic] have to >> include some special jar on the classpath? I searched the entire JDK >> installation for > > Apparently not the *entire* installation. What's not entire about: grep -rl EmbeddedDriver $JAVA_HOME ? This: locate derby.jar Also finds nothing. >> a mention of EmbeddedDriver, and there was none. Do i [sic] have some >> special version of 1.6 which lacks Derby? I have whatever came with >> Eeebuntu 3, which is basically Ubuntu 9.04. >> >> I haven't used Derby since before 1.6, so i have no positive control for >> how this should work. >> >> Anyway, since it looked like Derby would be a separate download for me, i >> [sic] went with H2 instead :). > > It's too bad your reason wasn't valid, at least not based on the > information you provided here. See my response to Mark. There's still no sign of Derby on my machine. My reason was apparently valid. According to this rather antique blog post: http://blogs.sun.com/FrancoisOrsini/entry/ubuntu_users_gets_java_db Ubuntu decided to make Derby a separate package. Digging around in my package info, it seems that this is still the case, and i don't have it installed. And that i can't install it through the package manager, because of some funky Ubunutu version conflict lameness. Oh joy. The right solution would probably be to forget about the package mananger and just install a binary package directly from Sun, which will have all the right bits in. Or just keep using H2. tom -- In Milan, [traffic lights] are instructions, in Rome suggestions, and in Naples Christmas decorations. -- James Dowden
From: Lew on 4 Apr 2010 20:12 Tom Anderson wrote: > According to this rather antique blog post: > > http://blogs.sun.com/FrancoisOrsini/entry/ubuntu_users_gets_java_db > > Ubuntu decided to make Derby a separate package. Digging around in my > package info, it seems that this is still the case, and i don't have it > installed. And that i can't install it through the package manager, > because of some funky Ubunutu version conflict lameness. Oh joy. > > The right solution would probably be to forget about the package > mananger and just install a binary package directly from Sun, which will > have all the right bits in. > > Or just keep using H2. There's the explanation for the difference. I install from Sun, not from Ubuntu apt. (Light bulb suddenly illuminating.) I hear good things about H2. -- Lew
From: Arne Vajhøj on 4 Apr 2010 20:28 On 04-04-2010 20:12, Lew wrote: > I hear good things about H2. ;ALLOW_LITERALS=NONE in the connection URL certainly is nice ! Arne
From: Arne Vajhøj on 4 Apr 2010 20:31 On 04-04-2010 20:02, Tom Anderson wrote: > See my response to Mark. There's still no sign of Derby on my machine. > My reason was apparently valid. > > According to this rather antique blog post: > > http://blogs.sun.com/FrancoisOrsini/entry/ubuntu_users_gets_java_db > > Ubuntu decided to make Derby a separate package. Digging around in my > package info, it seems that this is still the case, and i don't have it > installed. And that i can't install it through the package manager, > because of some funky Ubunutu version conflict lameness. Oh joy. That is pretty nasty of them. People that have installed Java expect to have a complete Java. I don't think SUN should have bundled Derby, but they did and tampering with the Java distribution is just bad. It may even be a violation of the license and/or trademark. Arne
From: Donkey Hottie on 4 Apr 2010 21:09
On 5.4.2010 3:31, Arne Vajh�j wrote: > On 04-04-2010 20:02, Tom Anderson wrote: >> See my response to Mark. There's still no sign of Derby on my machine. >> My reason was apparently valid. >> >> According to this rather antique blog post: >> >> http://blogs.sun.com/FrancoisOrsini/entry/ubuntu_users_gets_java_db >> >> Ubuntu decided to make Derby a separate package. Digging around in my >> package info, it seems that this is still the case, and i don't have it >> installed. And that i can't install it through the package manager, >> because of some funky Ubunutu version conflict lameness. Oh joy. > > That is pretty nasty of them. People that have installed Java expect > to have a complete Java. > > I don't think SUN should have bundled Derby, but they did and > tampering with the Java distribution is just bad. > > It may even be a violation of the license and/or trademark. > Debian package is also separate. But I do not have it in Windows either (new 19 JDK). I don't remember if it is optional in the installer, if it is, I may have left it out, as I do not need it. But no Derby on Windows disk. -- You will be held hostage by a radical group. |