Hi,
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:34:53PM +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Am 25.04.2016 um 12:23 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:17:52PM +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
> >> we are mainly concerned about runtime issues with OpenJDK 7. Libreoffice
> >&g
Hi,
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:17:52PM +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
> we are mainly concerned about runtime issues with OpenJDK 7. Libreoffice
> declares dependencies on default-jre | openjdk-7-jre, so I believe it
> should be fine. I am aware of build failures with OpenJDK 7 and I think
> that c
Hi,
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 06:22:51PM +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
> I would like to ask everyone who uses Java in server or desktop
> environments to test their applications with OpenJDK 7 and to prepare
> for the switch. This can be achieved by installing either openjdk-7-jre
> or openjdk-7-jr
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:45:46PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 26/05/2015 16:52, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > I think we should decide what our Java baseline is and how it affects
> > release archs_before_ changing this.
>
> The best we can do I think is to identi
Hi,
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 03:58:49PM +0200, Markus Koschany wrote:
> I think it is time to adjust the lintian warning about
> "incompatible-java-bytecode-format". The current version of Lintian
> still warns about Java 1.7 bytecode, however Java 1.7 is the default
> in Jessie and it is reasonabl
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 09:40:43AM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> enough to run Ant and LibreOffice (It would be interesting the run a
but only because I disable some parts on gcj-using archs (like the report
builder which depends on libraries already using 1.6+ APIs afaicr or
javadoc.)
Rega
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 01:24:52AM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 16/07/2014 00:07, Rene Engelhard a écrit :
>
> > This is nonsense. Not yet - not as long we want/need gcj (on some archs).
>
> Fair enough. But we already have a lot of packages incompatible with gcj
>
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:08:13PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> So if you update a package and see these settings please bump them to 1.6.
This is nonsense. Not yet - not as long we want/need gcj (on some archs).
And changing that now for jessie is not feasible.
Regards,
Rene
--
To UNSUBSC
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 08:41:20AM +0200, Sebastian Humenda wrote:
> As far as I have understood it, I can auto-generate / take a POM from the web,
> run mh_lspoms and after I have answered the questions of the script,
> everything
> which can be configured is configured. On the other hand th
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:20:21PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> FYI I've had slightly more luck building this locally on kfreebsd-amd64
> with openjdk-7. I built with -j1 (to keep memory requirements low) in a
debian/rules already sets -j1 for the tests explicitely, just the
build is p
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:41:18AM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> There are some curious mentions of gcj also in the failed build log.
Which are totally irrelevant for the thing here. You should trust the
person who fought with this crap since 11 years.
> > basename: missing operand
> > Try `
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:58:30PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> 2013/6/18 Rene Engelhard :
> > I am not sure. It built, yes, but running has some problems apparently:
> > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libreoffice&arch=kfreebsd-amd64&ver=1%3A4.1.0~beta2-1&am
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:02:00PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> The problem seen during libreoffice build might even be related to the
> openjdk-7 build issue on kfreebsd-i386.
Yeah, probably. (Seen that too)
Regards,
Rene
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:19:13AM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Please could kfreebsd-amd64 be added to the list of openjdk-7 arches on
> the next upload of java-common? (patch attached)
I am not sure. It built, yes, but running has some problems apparently:
https://buildd.debian.org/s
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 12:41:05PM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> That's the whole point. Maven is not part of the requirements from
> Debian Java policy.
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/
>
> There is absolutely no requirement for a packager to include the mave
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 02:28:42PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 02:02 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > - compile the jar.sos against -java-commons jars (b-d on itself on kbsd-*)
>
> The .jar.so files have no compile-time dependencies on anything.
> All dependenci
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:53:27PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Partly. It's temporary for kfreebsd-* (see below) , the rest will stay gone
> (everything except kfreebsd-* has OpenJDK available.)
[...}
> So it is, and yes, I plan to reenable it when gcc-defaults migrated
Hi,
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 02:58:38PM +0200, Torsten Werner wrote:
> - Get icedtea-7-jre-jamvm built on kfreebsd-*.
> - Remove *-gcj packages on all architectures except for a minimal set of
> *-gcj packages that are needed to bootstrap openjdk.
if openjdk then works (for LibreOffice) on ia64, y
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:14:08PM +0200, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
> On 16/06/11 21:36, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> >[ -bsd can be dropped I guess, but CC'ing now again to clean
> >thi sup, ad it's not BSD-specific ]
>
> This is a known side effect of the mult
[ -bsd can be dropped I guess, but CC'ing now again to clean
thi sup, ad it's not BSD-specific ]
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:15:19PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> libreoffice 3.3.3-1 fails to build on kfreebsd-* with the following
> (see
> https://buildd.debian.org/s
Hi,
libreoffice 3.3.3-1 fails to build on kfreebsd-* with the following
(see
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libreoffice&arch=kfreebsd-amd64&ver=1%3A3.3.3-1&stamp=1308240320
and
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=libreoffice&arch=kfreebsd-i386&ver=1%3A3.3.3-1&stamp=13
# actually I disagree with that but the handling for this should be consistent
# and the netbase maintainer handled the other bugs the same way
block 560238 by 562954
# merge, 560142 has important, so downgrading this, too
severity 562954 important
forcemerge 560142 562954
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Dec
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:27:34AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Yep. Searching in the Help still works.
(Though not if you built OOo with lucene 2.9.0 and run it with 2.4.1.
Bummer I don't really like to (build-)depend on liblucene2-java (>= 2.9))
Grüße/Reg
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:48:52AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:52:21PM +0200, Jan-Pascal van Best wrote:
> > I've uploaded a liblucene2-java version 2.9.0 to my private package
> > repository, debian-mentors and the pkg-java queue
On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:52:21PM +0200, Jan-Pascal van Best wrote:
> I've uploaded a liblucene2-java version 2.9.0 to my private package
> repository, debian-mentors and the pkg-java queue at alioth. Could the
> maintainers of the package that depend on liblucene2-java
> (openoffice.org, pauker,
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> IMO classpath-tools and free-java-sdk should be removed as well.
^^^
Shouldn't we provide a upgrade path for those who for whatever reason
installed free-java-sdk and make it depend on java-gcj-compat (or
openjdk6 w
Hi,
the recently accepted flutejava and flute-1.3-jfree packages use a
javacc generated parser - but they currently ship one pre-generated
which is not really the ideal way.
I don't feel comfortable uploading those to unstable with a parser not
being able to rebuilt/fixed if needed; this in turn
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
According to Ocke Janssens blog [1] OOo 2.3 will use
the Pentaho Reporting Engine[2] (formerly known as JFreeReport) for
its new "Report Generator".
Please package it.
[1] http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/report_designer_will_extend_the
[2] http://www.pen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>bsh 224
Can we get bsh 2.0bX into unstable (or at least experimental)?.
At least b1 seems to build fine with gcj4 (as OOo2 includes it in their
source tree and building it works..) so it can be moved to main (and
O
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 30. März 2005 14:18 schrieb Michael Koch:
> Looks like a problem with the incomplete implementation of NIO File
> locking in kaffe.
>
[...]
> Most probably same here.
>
> I dont looked into hsqldb source code to check but can ypu extract a
> testcase from it that reproduces the sa
Hi Jim,
Jim Pick wrote:
> Here's a little project for somebody.
>
> The Debian people want to put OpenOffice in their distribution, but in
> order to build it, they need to use Java. But their free software
> guidelines prevent them from using Sun's version in the building of the
> software beca
Hi Jim,
Jim Pick wrote:
> Here's a little project for somebody.
>
> The Debian people want to put OpenOffice in their distribution, but in
> order to build it, they need to use Java. But their free software
> guidelines prevent them from using Sun's version in the building of the
> software bec
32 matches
Mail list logo
