Your message dated Sat, 11 Jun 2005 10:02:26 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#285303: fixed in java-common 0.23
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 12 Dec 2004 12:35:57 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Dec 12 04:35:57 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from lns-vlq-7-lil-82-254-204-173.adsl.proxad.net (yellowpig.yi.org)
[82.254.204.173] (mail)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CdSxA-0005e2-00; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 04:35:57 -0800
Received: from seventeen
([127.0.0.1] helo=yellowpig.yi.org ident=mail)
by yellowpig.yi.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 1CdSx8-0007zP-00; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:35:55 +0100
Received: (nullmailer pid 30713 invoked by uid 1000);
Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:35:52 -0000
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:35:52 +0100
From: Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: java-common: Typo in JAVA policy
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Reportbug-Version: 3.4
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Package: java-common
Version: 0.22
Severity: normal
Hello Debian Java maintainers,
I found several typos in the Java policy. The corrections have to
be taken with a grain of salt since I am not a native speaker and
I know next to nothing about JAVA.
This is a diff of the text version with ^^^^ to mark changed words, so
you have some contexts.
For some unknown reason, I have changed 'classpath' to 'CLASSPATH'.
Revert it if it does not make sense.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--- java.old Sun Dec 12 13:21:25 2004
+++ java Sun Dec 12 13:21:20 2004
@@ -38,9 +38,9 @@
emacsen-common for instance. As far as I know, the only
subpolicy for a programming language, is that of Perl.
- Feel free to report comments, suggestions and/or disagrements
+ Feel free to report comments, suggestions and/or disagreements
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
to the java-common package (<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
- or the Debian Java mailinglist <debian-java@lists.debian.org>.
+ or the Debian Java mailing list <debian-java@lists.debian.org>.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Change requests should be sent as a bug to the java-common
package.
_________________________________________________________
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
Java compilers must provide java-compiler and/or
java2-compiler and depend on java-common. They must also
- depend on the needed runtime environemnt (java1-runtime and/or
+ depend on the needed runtime environment (java1-runtime and/or
^^^^^^^^^^^
java2-runtime).
They should use /etc/alternatives for the name 'javac' if they
@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@
(for instance a manual page per executable, see Policy 13.1).
If they have their own auxiliary classes, they must be in a
- jar file in /usr/share/java. The name of the jar should folow
+ jar file in /usr/share/java. The name of the jar should follow
^^^^^^
the same naming conventions as for libraries.
Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine and the needed
@@ -144,13 +144,13 @@
Java libraries packages must be named libXXX[version]-java
(without the brackets), where the version part is optional and
should only contain the necessary part. The version part
- should only be used to avoid naming colisions. The XXX part is
+ should only be used to avoid naming collisions. The XXX part is
^^^^^^^^^^
the actual package name used in the text below.
Their classes must be in jar archive(s) in the directory
/usr/share/java, with the name
packagename[-extraname]-fullversion.jar. The extraname is
- optional and used internaly within the package to separate the
+ optional and used internally within the package to separate the
^^^^^^^^^^
different jars provided by the package. The fullversion is the
version of that jar file. In some cases that is not the same
as the package version.
@@ -167,7 +167,7 @@
developers should know what to add to their wrappers.
This applies only to libraries, not to the core classes
- provied by a the runtime environment.
+ provided by a the runtime environment.
^^^^^^^^
Some Java libraries rely on code written in a "native"
language, such as JNI (Java Native Interface) code. This
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@
guavac, gcj and jikes, it cannot go to main. If your
package itself is free, it must go to contrib.
* If your binary package can run only with non-free virtual
- machines (classpath has a list of free versions), it
+ machines (CLASSPATH has a list of free versions), it
^^^^^^^^^
cannot go to main. If your package itself is free, it must
go to contrib.
_________________________________________________________
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@
The following points are discussions about the policy, either
because they have to be studied more, or are controversial.
- * Name and existance of the repository. It was removed in
+ * Name and existence of the repository. It was removed in
^^^^^^^^^
the latest version.
* The symbolic links in /usr/share/java be made by a script
instead, similar to the c-libraries.
@@ -225,11 +225,11 @@
It should exist some tool to parse this. How should it
work?
Should the tool also be used to create the necessary
- symbilic links needed by servlets under tomcat?
+ symbolic links needed by servlets under tomcat?
^^^^^^^^
- * Should there be a default classpath, similar to a
+ * Should there be a default CLASSPATH, similar to a
^^^^^^^^^
repository? Which jars should be included in that? A
standard and one optional part? If there are a default
- classpath (in the wrapper) how should it be overridden?
+ CLASSPATH (in the wrapper) how should it be overridden?
^^^^^^^^^
* How to check for a good enough jvm, and to select a proper
one to use. Are /etc/alternatives not good enough?
* Should the jvm internal classes be possible to override
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 285303-close) by bugs.debian.org; 11 Jun 2005 14:10:25 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jun 11 07:10:25 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from newraff.debian.org [208.185.25.31] (mail)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Dh6gr-0003Ka-00; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 07:10:25 -0700
Received: from katie by newraff.debian.org with local (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1Dh6Z8-0006WZ-00; Sat, 11 Jun 2005 10:02:26 -0400
From: Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Katie: $Revision: 1.56 $
Subject: Bug#285303: fixed in java-common 0.23
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Archive Administrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 10:02:26 -0400
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 7
Source: java-common
Source-Version: 0.23
We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
java-common, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:
java-common_0.23.dsc
to pool/main/j/java-common/java-common_0.23.dsc
java-common_0.23.tar.gz
to pool/main/j/java-common/java-common_0.23.tar.gz
java-common_0.23_all.deb
to pool/main/j/java-common/java-common_0.23_all.deb
A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.
Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed. If you
have further comments please address them to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.
Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (supplier of updated java-common package)
(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED])
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 13:59:20 +0200
Source: java-common
Binary: java-common
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.23
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Java Mailing List <debian-java@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Arnaud Vandyck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Description:
java-common - Base of all Java packages
Closes: 156547 197256 252219 285014 285303 290189 302887
Changes:
java-common (0.23) unstable; urgency=low
.
* Updated the Debian Java FAQ (closes: #156547, #252219), thanks to
Javier Fernandez-Sanguino Peña
* policy.xml: corrected typos (closes: #285303), thanks to Bill
Allombert
* debian/control:
+ (Uploaders) removed Ola Lundqvist from the uploaders (see
debian-java mailing list, June 2005)
+ (Uploaders) added myself
+ (Uploaders) added Debian Java Maintainers (closes: #302887)
* debian/README.Debian: corrected wrong path the the faq and the policy
and a typo (closes: #197256, #285014), thanks to Vincent Lefevre
* debian/copyright: moved Ola from current maintainers to previous
maintainers, updated the file with the debhelper gpl template, added
copyright years (closes: #290189)
Files:
f10ee26cd42d206ec0774b0856b662be 665 misc optional java-common_0.23.dsc
f5a2330e246d449e47c0f6d04554ce11 62942 misc optional java-common_0.23.tar.gz
115202d699924c02fd8741217f2c408b 73110 misc optional java-common_0.23_all.deb
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCquHM4vzFZu62tMIRAhPVAJ9sLIGkAKJC9NyDabQqSJS9RhY5MwCfSLFN
TSdNJjXG2zeV2nU0dKMK4V8=
=afeB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
