On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Ben Burton wrote:
>
> > java2-virtual-machine/dummy packages would help settle dependancies for non
> > Debian packaged JDK's, java2 compliant Debian packages could 'provide'
> > this. We could then 'depend' on it.
> > ,,,
> > ... perhaps we should introduce java2 in /etc/alternatives ?
>
> FWIW, I like both of these ideas.
Thanks.
> I think the package should still provide java-virtual-machine and offer an
> alternative for /etc/java also.
Do you mean that the java2-virtual-machine-dummy package should also
provide java-virtual-machine ? hmm... should it then 'conflict' with
java-virtual-machine-dummy (if it provides java-virtual-machine) as
they would both try to manage the same thing ?
> Is this leading to too much clutter? I've never really done packaging for
> apps that provide alternatives.
I'm sure if we think everything through beforehand the clutter will be
manageable, essentially we're just trying to handle two different
versions of java kits separately.
I wonder if the java-policy authors have any comments/thoughts on the
subject ?
Cheers,
Marcus
--
.....
,,$$$$$$$$$, Marcus Crafter
;$' '$$$$: Computer Systems Engineer
$: $$$$: Open Software Associates GmbH
$ o_)$$$: 82-84 Mainzer Landstrasse
;$, _/\ &&:' 60327 Frankfurt Germany
' /( &&&
\_&&&&' Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&&&&. Business Hours : +49 69 9757 200
&&&&&&&:
