At least for past releases some support of java is available on every architecture, not only for release architectures. A big advantage is that you don't have to use architecture specific build dependencies, but usually packages building architecture specific binary packages just work. That did change for the hurd recently, but hopefully is fixable. I would like to keep it this way, because it makes the work for porters easier. GCJ still seems to be good enough to build jni bindings.
Providing security updates for released versions is tedious, and not many people are working on getting these updates into the oldstable and stable releases. oldstable had only one openjdk version, stable unfortunately has two openjdk versions which need updates four times a year. For jessie there should be only one openjdk version in the release. Looking at the current state, this is openjdk-7, so what needs to be done, if we want to only ship openjdk-8? - build openjdk-8 on the architectures that openjdk-7 builds on. I don't think that dropping java support on some architecture for the release will be an option, this affects some more source packages in the archive. - have a test rebuild with openjdk-8, preferable using the zero interpreter so we may catch issues on the majority of release architectures. - make sure that at least the openjdk jtreg test results look reasonable and we don't see any regressions between 7 and 8. It would be interesting to compare test TCK results for those who have access to this testsuite. I would like to avoid having openjdk-8 in unstable until we have answers to these questions. It seems to be too easy to upload packages to unstable built using openjdk-8. I'll be at Debconf for the java BoF, but maybe most of the issues can be resolved even before Debconf. Matthias -- 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/53c54d31.2080...@debian.org
