On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:39:55PM +0200, Jan Schulz wrote: > Reply to the list, as I suspect, that you just missed the right key :) > At least I haven't found anything private in this mail
I did not, in fact, miss the right key. I replied privately because I was responding to a private message from you, and it is generally impolite to reply publicly to a private message (as you have done here, though in this case no harm has been done). Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:58:18 +0200 From: Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Use of update-alternatives or JAVA_HOME > * Matt Zimmerman wrote: > >Of course you can. You just create a new alternative called java1.4, and > >only JREs which can provide that capability register themselves as > >alternatives for it. > > That would be fine. Problem is, that you would have more problems with > it, because most programms are fine with /path/to/java, but not with > /usr/bin/java-1.4. If a program is fine with 'java', it can be trivially modified to accept 'java-1.4' in its place, and indeed, if it requires a recent version of java, that would be preferable. > If someone finds this usefull, I can write a proposel for this to be > included in the debian java policy. This won't be until end of august, > though, I will go on holidays on friday... I think that would be excellent. -- - mdz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
