On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:57:18PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 15/07/2014 16:22, Bill Allombert a écrit :
>
> > Could you please write the definition for each of them, and determine
> > whether
> > java1-runtime and java2-runtime should be kept ?
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Here is the definition of these packages:
>
> java5-runtime a Java runtime environment, Java version 5
> java6-runtime a Java runtime environment, Java version 6
> java7-runtime a Java runtime environment, Java version 7
> java8-runtime a Java runtime environment, Java version 8
> java9-runtime a Java runtime environment, Java version 9
> java5-runtime-headless a non graphical Java runtime environment, Java
> version 5
> java6-runtime-headless a non graphical Java runtime environment, Java
> version 6
> java7-runtime-headless a non graphical Java runtime environment, Java
> version 7
> java8-runtime-headless a non graphical Java runtime environment, Java
> version 8
> java9-runtime-headless a non graphical Java runtime environment, Java
> version 9
>
> java1-runtime and java2-runtime are still provided by gcj-jre and
> openjdk-{6,7,8} but they are obsolete. We remove them from the
> dependencies as we update the packages.
>
> java9-runtime isn't used yet but is likely to appear in Jessie+1,
> feel free to remove it if you prefer keeping only the packages currently
> used.
Fine! Could you get someone from the Java team double check and second this ?
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballo...@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140715183024.GA9657@yellowpig
