W liście z wto, 31-08-2004, godz. 07:59, Ricky Clarkson pisze:
> On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:50:54 +0200, Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:12:28 -0400,
> > "Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > PS: When Sarge is finally released shouldn't we think about renaming
> > > java-runtime to something like free-java-runtime and java2-runtime to
> > > something like non-free-java-runtime? OR to clearly document that
> > > java-runtime actually means "free runtime" and java2-runtime actually
> > > means "non-free runtime"?
> >
> > Very good idea.
> >
> > Seconded.
>
> It seems to me that the distinction is irrelevant. A free package is
> in main, a non-free package is in non-free or contrib (I can't
> remember the rules). If you introduce free-java-runtime then packages
> will start to depend on free-java-runtime and poor sods like me who
> use the Sun J2SE for everything will find themselves having to play
> around with dummy packages (equivs) to use those packages.
How does this differ from the situation we have currently? What I think
of is simply changing naming without any functional changes. On one
hand this seems to make little sense as there's substantial burden to
fix all the package's dependencies to change the strings, but on the
other it would not force free java runtimes to claim that they do not
support java2!
What we have currently is that no free java runtime is allowed to
Provide java2-runtime because all java packages unable to run with
free runtimes depend on java2-runtime. Please note that dependency
system does NOT know about main/contrib/non-free separation at all!
> Are there any precedents for this naming convention in Debian?
$ apt-cache search non-free |grep free
shows a couple of packages with "nonfree" in name. I also recall we had
some package names ending with "-dfsg" but somehow can't find any.
Note that we would NOT introduce actual package with this name
java-[non]free-runtime, just like we do not have java[2]-runtime
packages (with the exception that you might create one with equivs
and .control files from java-policy).
HTH
Grzegorz B. Prokopski
--
Grzegorz B. Prokopski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org
SableVM - LGPL'ed Java VM http://www.sablevm.org
Why SableVM ?!? http://devel.sablevm.org/wiki/Features
