We must come to terms with the fact that a Debian Java policy cannot be
built with proprietary VMs in mind. There is no "make it work" when it
comes to proprietary software and Debian.
>From the Social Contract:
"We will support our users who develop and run non-free software on
Debian, but we w
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>thanks for taking the time to write a well thought-out, and pointed
>response. I wasn't sure whether my reply was a bit vitriolic ;)
:) This discussion is nothing against being 'Proponent' of a new
german newsgroup...
[free, but not full featured]
>> featur
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>> I will still ask, that all 'java' alteratives (kaffe, gcj, etc) will
>> add as much API to their bootclasspath as possible.
>I can only speak for kaffe, but we are gradually trying to merge in as much of
>the free, GPL-compatible implementations of java API
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>but the other, much greater part of the problem is application writers who
>assume that the whole world uses sun's jdk. Thus they muck around with
>$JAVA_HOME, try to load sun.* classes, try to put a non-existant
>$JAVA_HOME/jre/tools.jar in their CLASSPATH,
Recipient of the attachment: MAILSRV1, First Storage Group\Private Information
Store (MAILSRV1), Eric Kort/Inbox
Subject of the message: Re: That movie
No action was taken on the attachment.
Attachment application.pif was Logged Only for the following reasons:
Scan Engine Failure (0x80
Recipient of the attachment: MAILSRV1, First Storage Group\Private Information
Store (MAILSRV1), Mail Admin/Inbox
Subject of the message: Re: That movie
No action was taken on the attachment.
Attachment application.pif was Logged Only for the following reasons:
Scan Engine Failure (0x8
What is the version of Xalan?
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 15:55:48 +0200
Fabian Lienert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dear list members,
>
> on a debian cluster running an opencms project with tomcat 4.1.24 and j2sdk1.4.2
> we are experiencing memory problems.
>
> there are 2 GB of memory. after start o
Hallo Jan,
thanks for taking the time to write a well thought-out, and pointed response. I
wasn't sure whether my reply was a bit vitriolic ;)
Now let's go back to the technical discussion:
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >think you are blowing the problem out of proportion and goin
We must come to terms with the fact that a Debian Java policy cannot be
built with proprietary VMs in mind. There is no "make it work" when it
comes to proprietary software and Debian.
>From the Social Contract:
"We will support our users who develop and run non-free software on
Debian, but we w
Hallo Jan,
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >B. It doesn't matter what proprietary software provides. This is Debian.
>
> Yes. And we should at least make this situation for our users as easy
> as possible. The situation now is IMO not.
part of the problem is that the free vms are n
Hallo Jan,
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will still ask, that all 'java' alteratives (kaffe, gcj, etc) will
> add as much API to their bootclasspath as possible.
I can only speak for kaffe, but we are gradually trying to merge in as much of
the free, GPL-compatible implementation
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>but the other, much greater part of the problem is application writers who
>assume that the whole world uses sun's jdk. Thus they muck around with
>$JAVA_HOME, try to load sun.* classes, try to put a non-existant
>$JAVA_HOME/jre/tools.jar in their CLASSPATH,
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>> I will still ask, that all 'java' alteratives (kaffe, gcj, etc) will
>> add as much API to their bootclasspath as possible.
>I can only speak for kaffe, but we are gradually trying to merge in as much of
>the free, GPL-compatible implementations of java API
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>thanks for taking the time to write a well thought-out, and pointed
>response. I wasn't sure whether my reply was a bit vitriolic ;)
:) This discussion is nothing against being 'Proponent' of a new
german newsgroup...
[free, but not full featured]
>> featur
Hi. I think there are some interesting ideas in this proposal, and
there are also some ideas that are more concerning to me.
> It would be nice, if this, and the transition (if it should
> happen...), are over before sarge is released.
Given that we are this close to freeze, I would be *very* r
What is the version of Xalan?
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 15:55:48 +0200
Fabian Lienert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> dear list members,
>
> on a debian cluster running an opencms project with tomcat 4.1.24 and
> j2sdk1.4.2
> we are experiencing memory problems.
>
> there are 2 GB of memory. after star
Hallo Jan,
thanks for taking the time to write a well thought-out, and pointed response. I
wasn't sure whether my reply was a bit vitriolic ;)
Now let's go back to the technical discussion:
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >think you are blowing the problem out of proportion and goin
Hallo Per,
No need to cc me each time.
* Per Bothner wrote:
>You may have to do that. If you don't have a VM that has been
>*tested* with the package you're trying to install, then you
>don't know if you can satisfy the dependency.
>For convenience, you can say (I don't know the appropriate synt
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Now that I am putting some real effort into Kaffe again I would like to
> >see an actual functioning framework of Java applications in main.
> >There is no Free VM that I am aware of that supports either Sun's 1.4 or
> >1.3 or even 1.2. Your solution
Hallo Ean,
* Ean Schuessler wrote:
>On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 18:39, Jan Schulz wrote:
>Why is there a one-to-one relationship with provides/depends and
>alternatives? You can certainly have:
>foojvm:
>provides: java.net, java.io, java.awt
>/usr/share/java/rt.jar ->
> /etc/alternatives/rt.jar -
Jan Schulz wrote:
On the other hand there is this 'and our users' part in there. And
they expect, that when I install a JVM of a certain version, that all
programms, which require a JVM of that version will work.
What you presumably mean is "when I install a JVM that claims to
be compatible with a
Hallo Jan,
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will still ask, that all 'java' alteratives (kaffe, gcj, etc) will
> add as much API to their bootclasspath as possible.
I can only speak for kaffe, but we are gradually trying to merge in as much of
the free, GPL-compatible implementation
Hallo Jan,
--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >B. It doesn't matter what proprietary software provides. This is Debian.
>
> Yes. And we should at least make this situation for our users as easy
> as possible. The situation now is IMO not.
part of the problem is that the free vms are n
Hallo Per,
* Per Bothner wrote:
>What you presumably mean is "when I install a JVM that claims to
>be compatible with a certain JDK version, then all programs which
>require a JVM compatible with that JDK version will work." This
>is still tautological and I'm not sure it's very useful. If a
co
Hallo Ben,
* Ben Burton wrote:
>Hi. I think there are some interesting ideas in this proposal, and
>there are also some ideas that are more concerning to me.
As you didn't critzise the getclasspath idea (as nonone else has), I
presume, that this is good for the nxt proposal. Same for the
browser
Jan Schulz wrote:
So what do you suggests as a alternative?
Stay with the
for i in $LIST_OF_ALL_KNOWN_JAVA_WHICH_WILL_WORK ; do
...
done
and having a Depends like this:
jsdk1.3 | jsdk1.4 |jsdk1.4-bd | j2sdk1.4-sun | kaffe (>..)|...
(sun, bd and ibm should be from mpkg-j2sdk) Just imagine
addition
Hallo Ben,
* Ben Burton wrote:
>Hi. I think there are some interesting ideas in this proposal, and
>there are also some ideas that are more concerning to me.
As you didn't critzise the getclasspath idea (as nonone else has), I
presume, that this is good for the nxt proposal. Same for the
browser
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Just because it doesn't do full java 1.x yet, it doesn't mean it's useless. I
I agree.
>think you are blowing the problem out of proportion and going for
>radical, simplistic solutions instead of trying to figure o
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 18:39, Jan Schulz wrote:
> On package system level, it isn't a problem. It becomes a problem,
> when you have alternatives. I have a VM, which provides java.net and
> java2-runtime-1.4 and another VM, which provides java.nio and
> java2-runtime-1.4. Now we have Program, which
Hallo Per,
No need to cc me each time.
* Per Bothner wrote:
>You may have to do that. If you don't have a VM that has been
>*tested* with the package you're trying to install, then you
>don't know if you can satisfy the dependency.
>For convenience, you can say (I don't know the appropriate synt
Hallo Ean,
* Ean Schuessler wrote:
>On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 18:39, Jan Schulz wrote:
>Why is there a one-to-one relationship with provides/depends and
>alternatives? You can certainly have:
>foojvm:
>provides: java.net, java.io, java.awt
>/usr/share/java/rt.jar ->
> /etc/alternatives/rt.jar -
Hi. I think there are some interesting ideas in this proposal, and
there are also some ideas that are more concerning to me.
> It would be nice, if this, and the transition (if it should
> happen...), are over before sarge is released.
Given that we are this close to freeze, I would be *very* r
Jan Schulz wrote:
So what do you suggests as a alternative?
Stay with the
for i in $LIST_OF_ALL_KNOWN_JAVA_WHICH_WILL_WORK ; do
...
done
and having a Depends like this:
jsdk1.3 | jsdk1.4 |jsdk1.4-bd | j2sdk1.4-sun | kaffe (>..)|...
(sun, bd and ibm should be from mpkg-j2sdk) Just imagine
additio
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 18:39, Jan Schulz wrote:
> On package system level, it isn't a problem. It becomes a problem,
> when you have alternatives. I have a VM, which provides java.net and
> java2-runtime-1.4 and another VM, which provides java.nio and
> java2-runtime-1.4. Now we have Program, which
Hallo Dalibor,
* Dalibor Topic wrote:
>--- Jan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Just because it doesn't do full java 1.x yet, it doesn't mean it's useless. I
I agree.
>think you are blowing the problem out of proportion and going for
>radical, simplistic solutions instead of trying to figure o
Hallo Per,
* Per Bothner wrote:
>What you presumably mean is "when I install a JVM that claims to
>be compatible with a certain JDK version, then all programs which
>require a JVM compatible with that JDK version will work." This
>is still tautological and I'm not sure it's very useful. If a
co
36 matches
Mail list logo
