On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Then it should be documented on the wiki, not at a random point in time
> in the java mailing list or bugreport.
Maybe. Then take that to the people who do such things.
I’m “just” a buildd admin.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstraße
Thorsten Glaser, le Tue 01 Sep 2015 09:58:54 +0200, a écrit :
> On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> > - "I don't think it is possible (yet) to have a >= dependency on a java
> > version." and yes, I was lazy to look for a proper solution.
>
> It is, and precisely this was recommended
On Tue, 1 Sep 2015, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> - "I don't think it is possible (yet) to have a >= dependency on a java
> version." and yes, I was lazy to look for a proper solution.
It is, and precisely this was recommended on some Debian java
mailing list or bugreport for precisely this problem.
Thorsten Glaser, le Tue 01 Sep 2015 09:13:17 +0200, a écrit :
> why don't you version the B-D then?
>
> Build-Depends: ..., default-jdk (>= 2:1.6), ...
Because:
- "I don't think it is possible (yet) to have a >= dependency on a java
version." and yes, I was lazy to look for a proper solution.
Hi,
why don't you version the B-D then?
Build-Depends: ..., default-jdk (>= 2:1.6), ...
That will cause GCJ arches to not even attempt the build,
beneficial for all.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +
5 matches
Mail list logo