Hi all,
currently i am registered as a debian maintainer wannabe :)
I am packaging a java deb: Jmol, a molecular viewer and got this
error with lintian:
W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar
W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar
W:
* Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]:
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-o
On Monday 15 January 2001 20:15, Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]:
> > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/multi.jar
> >
> > Should i just disregard these warnings?
>
> Never having used the debian packaging tools, my guess says that you
guavac has been up for adoption for 801 days now. I think upstream is
dead. There are other free Java compilers.
Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any
reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing
to adopt the package?)
(Please CC your rep
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
It may be worth asking on debian-java to see if there is still
any value in it. The only bug report in the debian BTS is not
too serious. On the other hand, it is no longer the only free
java compiler around (gcj, jikes etc) so there's probably
no value in keeping it.
on th
Nic Ferrier wrote:
> Well... all 2.2 onwards compliant servlet engines now have such a
> tool.
I guess you are talking about the deployment descriptor
(WEB-INF/web.xml) for webapps. But this is not what might be desired
for Cocoon: If you set the *.xml mapping for a Cocoon webapp, it will
only be
Egon Willighagen wrote:
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/jmol
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any
> reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing
> to adopt the package?)
I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build
process and jikes is much better alte
* Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010115 23:36]:
> I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build
> process and jikes is much better alternative anyway.
OK, it will be removed. Thanks for your input.
Could a
Replaces: guavac
be addded to jikes?
--
Mart
Hi all,
currently i am registered as a debian maintainer wannabe :)
I am packaging a java deb: Jmol, a molecular viewer and got this
error with lintian:
W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar
W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar
W:
* Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]:
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-
On Monday 15 January 2001 20:15, Seth Arnold wrote:
> * Egon Willighagen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010115 11:12]:
> > W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/multi.jar
> >
> > Should i just disregard these warnings?
>
> Never having used the debian packaging tools, my guess says that you
guavac has been up for adoption for 801 days now. I think upstream is
dead. There are other free Java compilers.
Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any
reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing
to adopt the package?)
(Please CC your re
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> It may be worth asking on debian-java to see if there is still
> any value in it. The only bug report in the debian BTS is not
> too serious. On the other hand, it is no longer the only free
> java compiler around (gcj, jikes etc) so there's probably
> no value in keepi
Nic Ferrier wrote:
> Well... all 2.2 onwards compliant servlet engines now have such a
> tool.
I guess you are talking about the deployment descriptor
(WEB-INF/web.xml) for webapps. But this is not what might be desired
for Cocoon: If you set the *.xml mapping for a Cocoon webapp, it will
only b
Egon Willighagen wrote:
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/vecmath1.1-1.12.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/junit.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/aelfred.jar
> W: jmol: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/java/jmo
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Is it ok if guavac is removed from Debian unstable, or are there any
> reasons to keep it? (If anyone wants to keep it, are you also willing
> to adopt the package?)
I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build
process and jikes is much better alt
* Stefan Gybas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [20010115 23:36]:
> I think it should be removed. No Java package uses it in its build
> process and jikes is much better alternative anyway.
OK, it will be removed. Thanks for your input.
Could a
Replaces: guavac
be addded to jikes?
--
Mart
18 matches
Mail list logo