Re: Bug#759558: gcj-4.9-jdk: broken symlinks for j{awt,ni}{,_md}.h

Am 28.08.2014 um 18:08 schrieb Steven Chamberlain: > reassign 759558 gcj-4.9-jdk > found 759558 gcc-4.9/4.9.1-9 > thanks > > gcj-4.9-jdk isn't a source package, so the BTS seems a little confused > about who to mail about this bug; I don't think the maintainers were > notified. The original bug

Re: gcj-4.9-jdk: broken symlinks for j{awt,ni}{,_md}.h

Hi! Steven Chamberlain writes: > On 28/08/14 16:44, Gilles Filippini wrote: >> Putting debian@bsd in the loop as adviced by KiBi, because >> (gcj-4.9-jdk == default-jdk) on kfreebsd-*. > > Thanks, nice to know about this. FWIW I'd prefer openjdk-7 as > kfreebsd's default JDK. > > We may see kfre

Re: debian java BoF - 2014/08/25

Hi tony, On 28.08.2014 00:24, tony mancill wrote: [...] First of all thank you for this very informative post. [...] > Sustainability/Maintainability: > > I made a strawman statement about whether we might consider paring down > Java within Debian to just a JDK and a few core packages (e.g. tom

Re: gcj-4.9-jdk: broken symlinks for j{awt,ni}{,_md}.h

Hi, On 28/08/14 16:44, Gilles Filippini wrote: > Putting debian@bsd in the loop as adviced by KiBi, because > (gcj-4.9-jdk == default-jdk) on kfreebsd-*. Thanks, nice to know about this. FWIW I'd prefer openjdk-7 as kfreebsd's default JDK. We may see kfreebsd-specific issues in openjdk-7 or gcj

Re: libspring-java security patch

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 6:55 PM, tony mancill wrote: > I just checked and it builds fine for me, but I suspect that it's > because my cowbuilder bind mounts my build area so that its path looks > the same to the bits of the build that run before entering the chroot to > those after entering that