On Tue, Jan 31, 2006 at 02:14:08PM +0530, ? ??? (Praveen
A) wrote:
> hi,
>
> Are we ready to say java-gcj-compat provides java2-runtime ? Or are we
> waiting till it says 100 % compatible. If we say it provides java2-runtime
> packages like azureus can be i
Azureus, is debian-java ready to provide a package in main that
> > > provides java2-runtime?
> >
> > We should get rid of this numbered javaX-runtime. This doesnt really
> > help these days anyway.
>
> Should applications simply depend on java-runtime then, i
On 2/4/06, Michael Koch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 12:36:55PM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> > Now that gij 4.1 can run many java2 mainstream applications, such as
> > Azureus, is debian-java ready to provide a package in main that
> > provides j
On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 12:36:55PM -0700, Shaun Jackman wrote:
> Now that gij 4.1 can run many java2 mainstream applications, such as
> Azureus, is debian-java ready to provide a package in main that
> provides java2-runtime?
We should get rid of this numbered javaX-runtime. This does
Now that gij 4.1 can run many java2 mainstream applications, such as
Azureus, is debian-java ready to provide a package in main that
provides java2-runtime?
Please cc me in your reply. Cheers,
Shaun
hi, Are we ready to say java-gcj-compat provides java2-runtime ? Or are we waiting till it says 100 % compatible. If we say it provides java2-runtime packages like azureus can be installed, which already runs fine with gij.
Just my 2.15 cents :-)Praveen A-- "GNU is the system
there any reason why java1-runtime and java2-runtime are the official
> runtimes, whereas java-compiler and java2-compiler are the official
> compilers? This inconsistency does not seem helpful in establishing
> consistency within the runtimes.
Yeah, I think the policy should be consolidate
> - java1-runtime stands for Java1 (i.e. up to Java 1.2).
> - java2-runtime stands for Java2 (i.e. Java 1.3 and higher).
>
> - free VMs generally only provide java1-runtime (java-runtime is IMHO
> wrong or a typo).
Does this mean that bugs should be filed with packages which pr
On 8/21/05, Eric Lavarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> I didn't see a reply to your email so I'll have a try:
>
> - java1-runtime stands for Java1 (i.e. up to Java 1.2).
> - java2-runtime stands for Java2 (i.e. Java 1.3 and higher).
I don'
Petter Reinholdtsen hungry.com> writes:
>
>
> [Eric Lavarde]
> > Conclusion:
> > - if your package works with free VMs, you should write something
> > like: kaffe | sablevm | java1-runtime.
>
> Is it not enough and recommended to list only one non-virtual package,
> aka 'kaffe | java1-runtime'
[Eric Lavarde]
> Conclusion:
> - if your package works with free VMs, you should write something
> like: kaffe | sablevm | java1-runtime.
Is it not enough and recommended to list only one non-virtual package,
aka 'kaffe | java1-runtime' or 'sablevm | java1-runtime'? I assume
would kaffe and sabl
Hi Charles,
I didn't see a reply to your email so I'll have a try:
- java1-runtime stands for Java1 (i.e. up to Java 1.2).
- java2-runtime stands for Java2 (i.e. Java 1.3 and higher).
- free VMs generally only provide java1-runtime (java-runtime is IMHO
wrong or a typo).
- the Sun
Hi,
I am trying to get the proper Depends line for the Bouncy Castle library
that I am packaging. Per the policy I found on the web, I depended on
java2-runtime, but then got a warning that
virtual-package-depends-without-real-package-depends. Looking at other
similar packages, I found that they
t on installing
java2-runtime and don't acknowledge java-virtual-machine.
Funny, these two are the only ones that follow the Debian Java Policy.
All others either just depend on java-common or on java-virtual-machine,
both is wrong accoding to the Java Policy.
I find it very interesting that t
Stefan Gybas wrote:
You can use equivs for that. See README.Debian in java-common for
details.
very nice. i see that this does take care of the problem, but how are
you going to get the user to know/do this, since when installing, all he
sees is a error message reporting missing dependencies. th
Stefan Gybas wrote:
You can use equivs for that. See README.Debian in java-common for
details.
very nice. i see that this does take care of the problem, but how are
you going to get the user to know/do this, since when installing, all he
sees is a error message reporting missing dependencies. th
Hi Josh,
josh buhl wrote:
well, this is always going to be a problem. i don't see how you can
remove the dummy packages without causing headaches for everybody who
wants to use Sun's j2sdk or j2re (or any other non debian jvm or
whatever). you need a dummy package to tell other debian packages
ackages that provide java2-runtime, since
I've already got the real deal. However, any package that depends on
java2-runtime or j2re1.4 for example refuses to install, although they
would run fine if they would install themselves. It seems that
installing the java-virtual-machine-dummy package s
Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I fully agree with you! The only useful things in the
> current Java Policy are /usr/share/java for JARs, /usr/lib/jni
> and the naming of library packages. Everything else is based
> on wrong assumtions. :-(
I also agree.
--
.''`.
:
Jerry Haltom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What I think we MUST do is aim to have a end user application, that
> runs on Java, work as expected. To this end, I see java2-runtime being
> provided by runtimes that conform to Sun's published standards, and no
> others. H
Hi Jerry,
Jerry Haltom wrote:
What I think we MUST do is aim to have a end user application, that runs
on Java, work as expected. To this end, I see java2-runtime being
provided by runtimes that conform to Sun's published standards, and no
others. However we verify that is up in th
ails in
> > debian-java or my eclipse buglog :( ), as sablevm seems to set a very
> > high u-a priority.
>
> To avoid misunderstandings: I don't think that sablevm should provide
> java2-runtime but then again we don't have an official definition of
> java2-runt
kages are installed to run
>tomcat4 although all depencenies are satisfied. I have to remove
>java2-runtime and only depend on the known to work JVMs.
I would like to do that as well, but recent BD packages, as I said
before, will not run eclipse as well in some cicumstances. So I
actually have
sablevm should provide
java2-runtime but then again we don't have an official definition of
java2-runtime so it's the maintainer's decision.
The /usr/bin/java* alternatives don't matter since tomcat4 does not use
them. I'm concerned that not all required packages are
On 27 Sep 2002, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Thomas" == Thomas J Zeeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas> The debianised blackdown jdk. It's still at a version 1+
> Thomas> years old and multiple releases have seen the light of
> Thomas> day.
>
> As of now (I just looked) jdk 1.3
On 27 Sep 2002, Stephen Zander wrote:
> > "Thomas" == Thomas J Zeeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas> The debianised blackdown jdk. It's still at a version 1+
> Thomas> years old and multiple releases have seen the light of
> Thomas> day.
>
> As of now (I just looked) jdk 1.
> "Thomas" == Thomas J Zeeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thomas> The debianised blackdown jdk. It's still at a version 1+
Thomas> years old and multiple releases have seen the light of
Thomas> day.
As of now (I just looked) jdk 1.3.1.02b is available in .deb form for
i386, powerpc
> "Thomas" == Thomas J Zeeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thomas> The debianised blackdown jdk. It's still at a version 1+
Thomas> years old and multiple releases have seen the light of
Thomas> day.
As of now (I just looked) jdk 1.3.1.02b is available in .deb form for
i386, powerp
of day.
> What are people's thoughts on how far away we are from having a real
> java2-runtime. I'd like to see this become a reality, as we have more
> and more apps that use it. Limewire needs it.
If you include the entire set of java(x) libraries in your definition of
j
> What are people's thoughts on how far away we are from having a real
> java2-runtime. I'd like to see this become a reality, as we have more
> and more apps that use it. Limewire needs it.
If you include the entire set of java(x) libraries in your definition of
java2-runtime it is
the latest version? The dummy package?
What are people's thoughts on how far away we are from having a real
java2-runtime. I'd like to see this become a reality, as we have more
and more apps that use it. Limewire needs it.
thanks
michael
--
michael cardenas | lead software en
een much activity though. :(
>
>
>
Updating what to the latest version? The dummy package?
What are people's thoughts on how far away we are from having a real
java2-runtime. I'd like to see this become a reality, as we have more
and more apps that use it. Limewire needs it.
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Tom Badran wrote:
> Is there a dummy debian package available that provides this or j2re1.3? I
The dummy-package is gone from the archive, but in the latest java-policy
there's a section on creating your own dummy package through the use of
the equivs-package. It can be fou
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002, Tom Badran wrote:
> Is there a dummy debian package available that provides this or j2re1.3? I
The dummy-package is gone from the archive, but in the latest java-policy
there's a section on creating your own dummy package through the use of
the equivs-package. It can be fo
Tom Badran a écrit:
Is there a dummy debian package available that provides this or j2re1.3? I
have the sun jdk installed and dont want to install the blackdown one just to
get frost to work. I have java-virtual-machine-dummy installed which is
enought to get tomcat4 to work, but no luck with wi
Tom Badran a écrit:
>Is there a dummy debian package available that provides this or j2re1.3? I
>have the sun jdk installed and dont want to install the blackdown one just to
>get frost to work. I have java-virtual-machine-dummy installed which is
>enought to get tomcat4 to work, but no luck w
Is there a dummy debian package available that provides this or j2re1.3? I
have the sun jdk installed and dont want to install the blackdown one just to
get frost to work. I have java-virtual-machine-dummy installed which is
enought to get tomcat4 to work, but no luck with with frost. If this do
Is there a dummy debian package available that provides this or j2re1.3? I
have the sun jdk installed and dont want to install the blackdown one just to
get frost to work. I have java-virtual-machine-dummy installed which is
enought to get tomcat4 to work, but no luck with with frost. If this d
Hi
On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 08:11:16PM +0200, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 13:51, Grzegorz Prokopski pisze:
> > W li?cie z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 11:21, Thomas J. Zeeman pisze:
> > > > I'm sure there used to be a dummy java package so that you could install
> > >
Hi
On Thu, Aug 08, 2002 at 08:11:16PM +0200, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> W li?cie z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 13:51, Grzegorz Prokopski pisze:
> > W li?cie z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 11:21, Thomas J. Zeeman pisze:
> > > > I'm sure there used to be a dummy java package so that you could install
> >
W liście z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 13:51, Grzegorz Prokopski pisze:
> W liście z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 11:21, Thomas J. Zeeman pisze:
> > > I'm sure there used to be a dummy java package so that you could install
> > > packages that depended on a jre package, but you supplied your own?
> > Yup, t
On Thu, 2002-08-08 at 12:51, Grzegorz Prokopski wrote:
> So that we weren't forced to reinvent the wheel all the time - I'd
> suggest having the set of control files (for equivs) for those dummy
> packages included in java-common.
>
> I am offering myself to prepare them if java-common maintainer
W liście z czw, 08-08-2002, godz. 11:21, Thomas J. Zeeman pisze:
> > I'm sure there used to be a dummy java package so that you could install
> > packages that depended on a jre package, but you supplied your own?
> Yup, they used to exist. They've been pulled 'cause ftp-masters don't
> seem to li
On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, Greg Wilkins wrote:
> The blackdown packages don't show in the lists I get via apt-get update
Yup. blackdown has it's own mirrors and the inclusion of their debs in
Debian is hindered by some legalese. Something to do with being liable.
Search the archive for more info.
> o
l
packages that depended on a jre package, but you supplied your own?
regards
Takashi Okamoto wrote:
From: Greg Wilkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: dummy java2-runtime in sid?
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 16:20:11 +0100
Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
junit: Depen
From: Greg Wilkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: dummy java2-runtime in sid?
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 16:20:11 +0100
> Sorry, but the following packages have unmet dependencies:
>junit: Depends: java2-runtime but it is not installable or
>j2re1.
There appears to be no dummy package to provide java2-runtime in sid?
So I can no longer install junit, or jikes etc:
wafer:~# apt-get install junit
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just did an upgrade and tomcat now requires java2-runtime which the
> Blackdown package of j2sdk1.3 does not provide. Is someone working
> to upgrade j2sdk1.3 control file so that I don't have to install jdk
> 1.1 t
Bill Wohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just did an upgrade and tomcat now requires java2-runtime which the
> Blackdown package of j2sdk1.3 does not provide. Is someone working
> to upgrade j2sdk1.3 control file so that I don't have to install jdk
> 1.1 t
Just did an upgrade and tomcat now requires java2-runtime which the
Blackdown package of j2sdk1.3 does not provide. Is someone working
to upgrade j2sdk1.3 control file so that I don't have to install jdk
1.1 to get tomcat to install?
In the meantime, is there any update-alterna
Just did an upgrade and tomcat now requires java2-runtime which the
Blackdown package of j2sdk1.3 does not provide. Is someone working
to upgrade j2sdk1.3 control file so that I don't have to install jdk
1.1 to get tomcat to install?
In the meantime, is there any update-alterna
51 matches
Mail list logo
