On 06.05.2010 16:00, Torsten Werner wrote:
Hi Matthias,
improving the current alternative-based system is needed, but you only replace
one inflexible system with another one.
That is intended somehow. Java-common should not be updated too often
and that is why the flavor mapping is based on directory names that do
not change often.
then sensible-* seems a waste of resources. maybe you could come up with a
rationale first, what you do want to achieve?
- no choice of a specific VM
- no choice of compiled or interpreted mode
Is the information easily available in the JDKs?
afaik, no. it's VM information. -X and -XX options depend on a specific VM.
While the java world seems to be most ix86 centric, IMO a distribution
should try to support java on all it's supported architectures. This
might include working around jvm issues on specific architectures.
May you add a use case to the Wiki page
<http://wiki.debian.org/Java/SensibleJava>? That would make it easier to
understand your issue.
well, the use case is selection of a VM (might be another path, or just another
option), selection of VM specific flags (-XX, Xint, -Xcomp, ...) depending on
architecture and application. Compare that with working around compiler bugs for
some architectures with setting CFLAGS in the rules file, and using workarounds
for architecture specific problems in the JIT (hotspot, shark).
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4be58f3f.2000...@debian.org
