Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> writes: > Am 02.05.2014 06:36, schrieb tony mancill: >> On 05/01/2014 10:05 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >>> Le 01/05/2014 18:27, Felix Natter a écrit : >> >>>> Another question: Is it sufficient to point "update-java-alternatives" >>>> to openjdk-8 in order to use it to build and run subsequent packages >>>> (that build-depend on default-jdk and depend on default-jre)? >>> >>> To build with Java 8 you have to change the JAVA_HOME variable. It's >>> defined in every debian/rules file and usually points to >>> /usr/lib/jvm/default-java. update-java-alternatives doesn't change the VM >>> linked to this path, you have to change debian/rules or install a >>> modified version of default-jdk: >>> >>> http://87.98.165.193/debian/java-common/ >> >> Given that we're 6 months from the freeze, and just 4 months from the >> deadline for any new transitions [1], is it reasonable to target uploading >> a new java-common to experimental that depends on openjdk-8 in the next >> month or so?
hello Matthias, > The first priority should be to ship with only one version of OpenJDK. Does that mean that you intend to ship openjdk-7 xor openjdk-8 in jessie? I think it would be good to keep openjdk-7 in case there are problems (like rendering problems [1]) with openjdk-8. I am in the process of testing 8, but I probably won't be able to reproduce all issues with 8 (and 7 seems to work quite well). [1] http://freeplane.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/Rendering_Issues BTW: my package jmapviewer still Depends: on openjdk-7-jre. This should soon be changed to default-jre, right? (I _think_ David wants to package 1.03 anyway...). Cheers and Best Regards, -- Felix Natter -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87tx9882nu....@bitburger.home.felix
