On Tue, 2015-06-09 at 14:29 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > James Cowgill, le Tue 09 Jun 2015 10:23:38 +0100, a écrit : > > It's probably better to just depend on default-jdk. > > java-atk-wrapper requires at least java 1.6. I would have tended to > prefer to advertise this as a build-dependency (as 0.33.0-2 does) > than a build failure (as 0.33.0-1 did). That actually makes sense in > the kfreebsd case for instance, whois AIUI default-jdk is gcj, which > is at most java 1.5, but openjdk-7-sdk exists there too. > > What do you think?
Firstly I'm not a java person, I just noticed this because the buildds don't like ORed build-dependencies which are partially satisfiable. Eg the freebsd and sparc builds are currently looping and will continue until an admin stops them: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=java-atk-wrapper I don't think it is possible (yet) to have a >= dependency on a java version. You could depend on openjdk-7 but you'll have to update it when the default changes. On freebsd the latest version of openjdk-7 failed to build almost 2 months ago: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=openjdk-7 Maybe you could ask the java list for the best way to deal with this? James
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
