Yes. This looks more like bad packaging than either bad environment or code.
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <h...@debian.org> wrote: > retitle 626020 zookeeper: incorrect dependency information > thanks > > On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, Ted Dunning wrote: >> I just looked at this bug and it looks like a configuration error in >> the environment rather than a bug in Zookeeper per se. >> >> In particular, Java >= 1.6 is an explicit requirement of the Zookeeper >> package while the error being emitted is highly characteristic of an >> attempt to compile 1.6 compatible code on a java 1.5 compiler. > > The Debian package declares: > > Depends: libzookeeper-java (= 3.3.1+dfsg1-2), default-jre-headless | > java6-runtime-headless, adduser > > which looks like it would allow the package to be installed on java-5 > environments at first glance. That would be a grave bug by itself. > > It also declares: > > Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 7.4.11), javahelper (>= 0.28), default-jdk (>= > 1.6), ant (>= 1.6.0), liblog4j1.2-java (>> 1.2.15-8), junit4, > libxerces2-java, libjline-java, libnetty-java, javacc, default-jdk-doc, > python-all-dev, python-support, libboost-dev, libxml2-dev, liblog4cxx10-dev, > autoconf, help2man, libtool, automake, libcppunit-dev > > Which is ALSO broken, due to the use of epochs in the default-jdk > versioning. It would have to declare a build-dependency on "default-jdk (>= > 1:1.6)". > > As it stands, it allows the package to be built under java-5, which appears > to be the reason for the FBTFS report from MIPS. > > -- > "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring > them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond > where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot > Henrique Holschuh > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, send mail to 626020-unsubscr...@bugs.debian.org. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
