On Tue, 14 Sep 1999, Seth R Arnold wrote: > On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 11:24:35PM -0500, Ean R . Schuessler wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 14, 1999 at 11:11:43PM -0300, Julio wrote: > > > Can a virtual package have a version (to be set by a 'real' package that > > > implements it)? If so, it'd be useful to have java-virtual-machine > > > packages to set their jdk-compliance versions (1.0, 1.1, 1.2) when > > > installing (or being set by update-alternatives), since it's better to > > > bind some packages on virtual machines of specific versions. > > > > I agree with this concept as well. > > > > also. can we make it "jvm", instead of "java-virtual-machine"? > > > > jvm-sun-1.1 > > jvm-sun-1.2 > > jvm-iso-? > > > > It would probably be prudent to eliminate the word "java" from every > > Debian package name, description, etc. since it is a trademark first and > > a language second. > > FWIW, I like the idea too. :) The netscape package situation was a mess, and > the virtual packages helps out immensly. I would like to know which packages > are needed to do java developement versus java runtime -- and the virtual > packages did a slick enough job with a similar problem and netscape. :)
Thank you. :) Adam (the netscape maintainer)
