JBoss debs?

Is there any timeline for bringing JBoss over to Debian? -- Darryl L. Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Visit the Infobahn Offramp - "What do you care what other people think, Mr. Feynman?" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Troub

Re: JBoss debs?

how's very soon? you can find my packages for 3.0.2 + tomcat at http://debian.innovationsw.com/ I have plans for 3.2 next. -joe On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 11:18, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > Is there any timeline for bringing JBoss over to Debian? -- Innovation Software Group, LLC - http://www.i

Re: JBoss debs?

On 2003.01.10 12:00 Joe Phillips wrote: how's very soon? Too slow for me. I need it yesterday. :) you can find my packages for 3.0.2 + tomcat at http://debian.innovationsw.com/ I have plans for 3.2 next. Will it have any impact on my distribution? I'm currently using sarge and am pulling J

Re: JBoss debs?

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 13:37, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > On 2003.01.10 12:00 Joe Phillips wrote: > > how's very soon? > > Too slow for me. I need it yesterday. :) I had it yesterday but you didn't ask. 8) > > you can find my packages for 3.0.2 + tomcat at > > http://debian.innovationsw.com/ > >

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:14, Andrew Pimlott wrote: > Oooh--I'll answer this! > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 05:03:32PM -0500, Joe Phillips wrote: > > I've seen package after package (mine included) depend on a > > JAVA_HOME environment variable set somewhere, in some script. > > Most packages seem to

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

> Is this the concensus? You have been my only response so far. Since > JAVA_HOME is so common, I hope mention of it would be made in the java > policy documentation. Well I agree with Andrew. AIUI, JAVA_HOME is not appropriate for java interpreters such as gij or some of the other free alterna

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 19:36, Ben Burton wrote: > Can't say much about the tools.jar issue; I don't know what it provides and > how standardised that is. I haven't delved too deeply into the bowels of JBOSS/Tomcat *yet* but as I understand it, it contains the java compiler. Here's my understandi

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 20:30, Pieter Laeremans wrote: > so it looks like a rather important file. > > Maybe one might place a tools.jar in /usr/share/java that's basically what I'm proposing we add to the java policy, put an alternatives-managed tools.jar into /usr/share/java/. -joe --

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

Joe Phillips wrote: I haven't delved too deeply into the bowels of JBOSS/Tomcat *yet* but as I understand it, it contains the java compiler. Ant is a simpler example. ant (/usr/share/ant/bin/ant) command is a short shell script worth reading. The Sun java compiler is written in java. javac is

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:16:22PM -0500, Joe Phillips wrote: > On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:14, Andrew Pimlott wrote: > > Any package that depends on JAVA_HOME should be taken out and shot. > > Or, more politely, when it is packaged for Debian, those portions > > should be excised. > > Is this the co

JBoss debs?

Is there any timeline for bringing JBoss over to Debian? -- Darryl L. Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Visit the Infobahn Offramp - "What do you care what other people think, Mr. Feynman?"

Re: JBoss debs?

how's very soon? you can find my packages for 3.0.2 + tomcat at http://debian.innovationsw.com/ I have plans for 3.2 next. -joe On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 11:18, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > Is there any timeline for bringing JBoss over to Debian? -- Innovation Software Group, LLC - http://www.i

Re: JBoss debs?

On 2003.01.10 12:00 Joe Phillips wrote: how's very soon? Too slow for me. I need it yesterday. :) you can find my packages for 3.0.2 + tomcat at http://debian.innovationsw.com/ I have plans for 3.2 next. Will it have any impact on my distribution? I'm currently using sarge and am pulling Java from

Re: JBoss debs?

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 13:37, Darryl L. Pierce wrote: > On 2003.01.10 12:00 Joe Phillips wrote: > > how's very soon? > > Too slow for me. I need it yesterday. :) I had it yesterday but you didn't ask. 8) > > you can find my packages for 3.0.2 + tomcat at > > http://debian.innovationsw.com/ > >

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:14, Andrew Pimlott wrote: > Oooh--I'll answer this! > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 05:03:32PM -0500, Joe Phillips wrote: > > I've seen package after package (mine included) depend on a > > JAVA_HOME environment variable set somewhere, in some script. > > Most packages seem to

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

> Is this the concensus? You have been my only response so far. Since > JAVA_HOME is so common, I hope mention of it would be made in the java > policy documentation. Well I agree with Andrew. AIUI, JAVA_HOME is not appropriate for java interpreters such as gij or some of the other free alterna

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 19:36, Ben Burton wrote: > Can't say much about the tools.jar issue; I don't know what it provides and > how standardised that is. I haven't delved too deeply into the bowels of JBOSS/Tomcat *yet* but as I understand it, it contains the java compiler. Here's my understandi

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 20:30, Pieter Laeremans wrote: > so it looks like a rather important file. > > Maybe one might place a tools.jar in /usr/share/java that's basically what I'm proposing we add to the java policy, put an alternatives-managed tools.jar into /usr/share/java/. -joe --

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

Joe Phillips wrote: I haven't delved too deeply into the bowels of JBOSS/Tomcat *yet* but as I understand it, it contains the java compiler. Ant is a simpler example. ant (/usr/share/ant/bin/ant) command is a short shell script worth reading. The Sun java compiler is written in java. javac is mere

Re: JAVA_HOME policy

On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 07:16:22PM -0500, Joe Phillips wrote: > On Thu, 2003-01-02 at 18:14, Andrew Pimlott wrote: > > Any package that depends on JAVA_HOME should be taken out and shot. > > Or, more politely, when it is packaged for Debian, those portions > > should be excised. > > Is this the co