Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: packageincorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Stephen Zander
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ola> On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:30:07AM -0800, Dalibor Topic wrote: Ola> I think that major new things (i.e. swing and awt) from java1 Ola> (from 1.0, or maybe only from 1.1 and above) should be broken Ola> down. What doe you

Re: request feedback on JBOSS debs

2003-01-21 Thread Stephen Zander
> "Joe" == Joe Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Joe> On Mon, 2003-01-20 at 14:44, Adam Heath wrote: >> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Greg Wilkins wrote: >> > + The setting of JAVA_HOME should be done by an auto search >> and/or > a debconf dialog. >> >> Use /etc/defaults/jbo

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 02:20:54AM +1100, Ben Burton wrote: *SNIP* > > As an aside, it's also worth noting that even if package dependencies > become so restricted that they end up depending on a single JVM, having a > package depend on a specific JVM doesn't at all imply that that specific > JVM

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:41:50AM -0800, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Hi Ben, *SNIP* > > > > Perhaps Depends: kaffe | java1-runtime to show the > > user that I know it > > works on kaffe but to allow a user to install some > > other JVM instead? This is preferred anyway. Actually you will get a linti

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 02:20:54AM +1100, Ben Burton wrote: *SNIP* > > As an aside, it's also worth noting that even if package dependencies > become so restricted that they end up depending on a single JVM, having a > package depend on a specific JVM doesn't at all imply that that specific > JVM

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:41:50AM -0800, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Hi Ben, *SNIP* > > > > Perhaps Depends: kaffe | java1-runtime to show the > > user that I know it > > works on kaffe but to allow a user to install some > > other JVM instead? This is preferred anyway. Actually you will get a linti

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ben, --- Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'd like to point out that I wasn't advocating > that > > the debian maintainer tracks all VMs available > for > > debian all the time. Just that she specifies a > (i.e. > > at least one ;) free VM that the application works > > with in ord

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ben Burton
> I'd like to point out that I wasn't advocating that > the debian maintainer tracks all VMs available for > debian all the time. Just that she specifies a (i.e. > at least one ;) free VM that the application works > with in order to be in 'debian-free'. Mm.. what worries me about this is that i

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ben, --- Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see java-runtime as a similar situation. I take a > simple Java app > that will run on any JVM that is reasonably > complete, and I want to just > have Depends: java1-runtime, allowing the user to > download whatever JVM > they see fit. I do

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ben Burton
> If I may make a proposal, as someone who's just a > lurker here, I'd say remove the 'provides > javax-runtime' tag from the free VM releases that > obviously lack the functionality of the tagged JDK > release, according to japitools. But only allow Java > programs to get into 'debain free' if th

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ben, --- Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'd like to point out that I wasn't advocating > that > > the debian maintainer tracks all VMs available > for > > debian all the time. Just that she specifies a > (i.e. > > at least one ;) free VM that the application works > > with in ord

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ben Burton
> I'd like to point out that I wasn't advocating that > the debian maintainer tracks all VMs available for > debian all the time. Just that she specifies a (i.e. > at least one ;) free VM that the application works > with in order to be in 'debian-free'. Mm.. what worries me about this is that i

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ben, --- Ben Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see java-runtime as a similar situation. I take a > simple Java app > that will run on any JVM that is reasonably > complete, and I want to just > have Depends: java1-runtime, allowing the user to > download whatever JVM > they see fit. I do

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ben Burton
> If I may make a proposal, as someone who's just a > lurker here, I'd say remove the 'provides > javax-runtime' tag from the free VM releases that > obviously lack the functionality of the tagged JDK > release, according to japitools. But only allow Java > programs to get into 'debain free' if th

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:30:07AM -0800, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Hi Ola, > > --- Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well then we have to have an alternative approach to > > this. > > > > javaX-core-classes (I assume that there are This is the java.lang.* and such things that nee

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ola, --- Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well then we have to have an alternative approach to > this. > > javaX-core-classes (I assume that there are > differences between versions there) > javaX?-awt > javaX?-swing > > Then java1-runtime depends on java1-core-classes, > java1-awt

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:30:07AM -0800, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Hi Ola, > > --- Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Well then we have to have an alternative approach to > > this. > > > > javaX-core-classes (I assume that there are This is the java.lang.* and such things that nee

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 10:01:56AM -0500, Jesse Stockall wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 09:33:28AM +0100, Ola Lundqvist wrote: > > > > If you have better definitions on how to define java1-runtime and/or > > > > java2-runtime, I'm grateful for such propositions. > > > > > > If AWT / GUI stuf

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
Hi On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 04:51:11PM +, Geoff Beaumont wrote: > Jesse Stockall wrote: > >Only packages that provide a complete JDK 1.1 class library and > >functioning VM should provide java1-runtime. Same for java2-runtime. > > > >For the same reason that Microsoft does not call their VM a

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Ola Lundqvist
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:34:20AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> If AWT / GUI stuff is a particular problem (which is my understanding), > >> I think it would make sense to define virtual packag

Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime

2003-01-21 Thread Dalibor Topic
Hi Ola, --- Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well then we have to have an alternative approach to > this. > > javaX-core-classes (I assume that there are > differences between versions there) > javaX?-awt > javaX?-swing > > Then java1-runtime depends on java1-core-classes, > java1-awt