Re: Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

* Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010115 23:36]: > I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build > process and jikes is much better alternative anyway. OK, it will be removed. Thanks for your input. Could a Replaces: guavac be addded to jikes? -- Mart

Re: Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any > reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing > to adopt the package?) I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build process and jikes is much better alte

Re: Building java packages

Egon Willighagen wrote: > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/jmol

Re: RFC: provides: java-servlet-engine

Nic Ferrier wrote: > Well... all 2.2 onwards compliant servlet engines now have such a > tool. I guess you are talking about the deployment descriptor (WEB-INF/web.xml) for webapps. But this is not what might be desired for Cocoon: If you set the *.xml mapping for a Cocoon webapp, it will only be

Re: Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

Martin Michlmayr wrote: It may be worth asking on debian-java to see if there is still any value in it. The only bug report in the debian BTS is not too serious. On the other hand, it is no longer the only free java compiler around (gcj, jikes etc) so there's probably no value in keeping it. on th

Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

guavac has been up for adoption for 801 days now. I think upstream is dead. There are other free Java compilers. Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing to adopt the package?) (Please CC your rep

Re: Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

* Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010115 23:36]: > I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build > process and jikes is much better alternative anyway. OK, it will be removed. Thanks for your input. Could a Replaces: guavac be addded to jikes? -- Mart

Re: Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any > reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing > to adopt the package?) I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build process and jikes is much better alt

Re: Building java packages

Egon Willighagen wrote: > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/jmo

Re: RFC: provides: java-servlet-engine

Nic Ferrier wrote: > Well... all 2.2 onwards compliant servlet engines now have such a > tool. I guess you are talking about the deployment descriptor (WEB-INF/web.xml) for webapps. But this is not what might be desired for Cocoon: If you set the *.xml mapping for a Cocoon webapp, it will only b

Re: Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

Martin Michlmayr wrote: > It may be worth asking on debian-java to see if there is still > any value in it. The only bug report in the debian BTS is not > too serious. On the other hand, it is no longer the only free > java compiler around (gcj, jikes etc) so there's probably > no value in keepi

Re: Building java packages

On Monday 15 January 2001 20:15, Seth Arnold wrote: > * Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]: > > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/multi.jar > > > > Should i just disregard these warnings? > > Never having used the debian packaging tools, my guess says that you

Can 'guavac' be removed from Debian unstable?

guavac has been up for adoption for 801 days now. I think upstream is dead. There are other free Java compilers. Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing to adopt the package?) (Please CC your re

Re: Building java packages

* Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]: > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-o

Building java packages

Hi all, currently i am registered as a debian maintainer wannabe :) I am packaging a java deb: Jmol, a molecular viewer and got this error with lintian: W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar W:

Re: Building java packages

On Monday 15 January 2001 20:15, Seth Arnold wrote: > * Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]: > > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/multi.jar > > > > Should i just disregard these warnings? > > Never having used the debian packaging tools, my guess says that you

Re: Building java packages

* Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]: > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-

Building java packages

Hi all, currently i am registered as a debian maintainer wannabe :) I am packaging a java deb: Jmol, a molecular viewer and got this error with lintian: W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar W: