real package with it?
if yes which?
Depends: java2-runtime | j2re1.3 | j2re1.4
> Does this warrant a mass filing of bugs?
Which severity do you plan to put in the bug?
> ara -list '!Depends=~/java.\-runtime/ & Package=~/lib.*java$/i' | wc -l
> 51
Is it so mutch
real package with it?
if yes which?
Depends: java2-runtime | j2re1.3 | j2re1.4
> Does this warrant a mass filing of bugs?
Which severity do you plan to put in the bug?
> ara -list '!Depends=~/java.\-runtime/ & Package=~/lib.*java$/i' | wc -l
> 51
Is it so mutch
Hi,
A lot of java libraries do not depend on java.-runtime (policy section
2.4 - Java libraries must depend on the needed runtime environment
(java1-runtime and/or java2-runtime))
Does this warrant a mass filing of bugs?
ara -list '!Depends=~/java.\-runtime/ & Package=~/lib.*java
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:55:22AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
>
Hi
There are several reasons why they are split.
1) some compilers do not require a jvm.
2) Some things compile the classes to bytecode the will not
need the jvm. This is why it is very explictly written in the
java policy
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:55:22AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
>
Hi
There are several reasons why they are split.
1) some compilers do not require a jvm.
2) Some things compile the classes to bytecode the will not
need the jvm. This is why it is very explictly written in the
java policy
Stephen Zander wrote:
Depending on the core classes does not provide javac which is what the
autobuilders actually require.
The build dependencies for Java packages could be for example:
jikes, classpath, lib*-java (all other required Java packages)
If all lib*-java packages in main depend on java1
Ok, I should stop reading mail at 3am...
> "Simon" == Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon> I think the autobuilder argument is valid. Autobuilders
Simon> need the classes, but not the VM. If at all, you can make
Simon> the VMs depend on the core classes, so people can
> "Simon" == Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon> I think the autobuilder argument is valid. Autobuilders
Simon> need the classes, but not the VM. If at all, you can make
Simon> the VMs depend on the core classes, so people can depend on
Simon> the core classes for c
Stephen,
> Ola, we go round and round on this. Having java1-runtime only mean
> the java.* classes doesn't add anything. Packages shouldn't have to
> depend on two virtual packages; java1-rutime should be a superset of
> the functionality of java-virual-machine not a disjoint set.
I think the a
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> This is false. If the package provides the core classes it
Ola> should provide java1-runtime but NOT java-virtual-machine. If
Ola> it provides the virtual-machine it should provide
Ola> java-virtual-machine. If this is no
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> This is false. If the package provides the core classes it
Ola> should provide java1-runtime but NOT java-virtual-machine. If
Ola> it provides the virtual-machine it should provide
Ola> java-virtual-machine. If this is no
Stephen Zander wrote:
Depending on the core classes does not provide javac which is what the
autobuilders actually require.
The build dependencies for Java packages could be for example:
jikes, classpath, lib*-java (all other required Java packages)
If all lib*-java packages in main depend on
Ok, I should stop reading mail at 3am...
> "Simon" == Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon> I think the autobuilder argument is valid. Autobuilders
Simon> need the classes, but not the VM. If at all, you can make
Simon> the VMs depend on the core classes, so people can
> "Simon" == Simon Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Simon> I think the autobuilder argument is valid. Autobuilders
Simon> need the classes, but not the VM. If at all, you can make
Simon> the VMs depend on the core classes, so people can depend on
Simon> the core classes for c
Stephen,
> Ola, we go round and round on this. Having java1-runtime only mean
> the java.* classes doesn't add anything. Packages shouldn't have to
> depend on two virtual packages; java1-rutime should be a superset of
> the functionality of java-virual-machine not a disjoint set.
I think the a
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> This is false. If the package provides the core classes it
Ola> should provide java1-runtime but NOT java-virtual-machine. If
Ola> it provides the virtual-machine it should provide
Ola> java-virtual-machine. If this is no
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> This is false. If the package provides the core classes it
Ola> should provide java1-runtime but NOT java-virtual-machine. If
Ola> it provides the virtual-machine it should provide
Ola> java-virtual-machine. If this is no
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 10:43:55PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Stefan" == Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefan> Currently the following packages in testing provide
> Stefan> java1-runtime: gij-3.0, gij-3.2, orp-classpath and
> Stefan> sablevm. All of them include
> "Stefan" == Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefan> Currently the following packages in testing provide
Stefan> java1-runtime: gij-3.0, gij-3.2, orp-classpath and
Stefan> sablevm. All of them include (or depend on) a Java virtual
Stefan> machine so if I add this depen
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 10:43:55PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Stefan" == Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stefan> Currently the following packages in testing provide
> Stefan> java1-runtime: gij-3.0, gij-3.2, orp-classpath and
> Stefan> sablevm. All of them include
> "Stefan" == Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefan> Currently the following packages in testing provide
Stefan> java1-runtime: gij-3.0, gij-3.2, orp-classpath and
Stefan> sablevm. All of them include (or depend on) a Java virtual
Stefan> machine so if I add this depen
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 09:33:49AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> To that end I will be filing important bugs against any lib*-java
> package that does not depend on either java1-runtime or java2-runtime
> (should the package required features of the standard java.* classes
> that are only include
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 09:33:49AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> To that end I will be filing important bugs against any lib*-java
> package that does not depend on either java1-runtime or java2-runtime
> (should the package required features of the standard java.* classes
> that are only include
W liście z pon, 02-12-2002, godz. 08:18, Ola Lundqvist pisze:
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 09:50:36AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > > "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ola> Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine (because they
> > Ola> will need it in order to
W liście z pon, 02-12-2002, godz. 08:18, Ola Lundqvist pisze:
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 09:50:36AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > > "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ola> Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine (because they
> > Ola> will need it in order to
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 09:50:36AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ola> Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine (because they
> Ola> will need it in order to run).
>
> Given's Dalibor Topic's comment on this list
> (<[EMAIL PRO
On Sat, Nov 30, 2002 at 09:50:36AM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ola> Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine (because they
> Ola> will need it in order to run).
>
> Given's Dalibor Topic's comment on this list
> (<[EMAIL PRO
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine (because they
Ola> will need it in order to run).
Given's Dalibor Topic's comment on this list
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>), should we
declare java[12]-runtime to be a superset of java-virtu
> "Ola" == Ola Lundqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ola> Programs must depend on java-virtual-machine (because they
Ola> will need it in order to run).
Given's Dalibor Topic's comment on this list
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>), should we
declare java[12]-runtime to be a superset of java-virtu
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 12:41:47PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Stephen" == Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stephen> What I think you're suggesting is that lib*-java classes
> Stephen> would depend on a virtual package that provides the
> Stephen> java.* classes, e
On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 12:41:47PM -0800, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Stephen" == Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stephen> What I think you're suggesting is that lib*-java classes
> Stephen> would depend on a virtual package that provides the
> Stephen> java.* classes, e
> "Stephen" == Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stephen> What I think you're suggesting is that lib*-java classes
Stephen> would depend on a virtual package that provides the
Stephen> java.* classes, e.g. classpath, that was seperate from
Stephen> the virtual package t
> "Stephen" == Stephen Zander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stephen> What I think you're suggesting is that lib*-java classes
Stephen> would depend on a virtual package that provides the
Stephen> java.* classes, e.g. classpath, that was seperate from
Stephen> the virtual package t
33 matches
Mail list logo
