Processed: your mail

2014-07-15 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > unarchive 730133 Bug #730133 {Done: Sylvestre Ledru } [src:java-common] java-common: policy vs lintian: needless-dependency-on-jre Unarchived Bug 730133 > reopen 730133 Bug #730133 {Done: Sylvestre Ledru } [src:java-common] java-common: policy v

Bug#754876: Virtual packages for the new Java runtimes

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Package: debian-policy Severity: wishlist Hi, The list of virtual packages [1] contains only two packages for the Java runtimes (java1-runtime and java2-runtime), but new virtual packages have been in use since at least 2008 when sun-java and openjdk started to be packaged [2]. Could you please

Bug#730133: fixed in java-common 0.50

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Reopening, java-common/0.50 removed the required runtime for Java programs instead of Java libraries. Emmanuel Bourg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5

Re: RFS: openjdk-8/8u5-b13-1 (NEW)

2014-07-15 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 11.07.2014 22:47, schrieb Emmanuel Bourg: > Le 11/07/2014 20:09, Matthias Klose a écrit : > >> To be clear, there was nothing restarted. It is done the way I recommended >> Emmanuel before he did start, and which he did ignore. > > Matthias again I don't understand what you are referring to.

java for jessie

2014-07-15 Thread Matthias Klose
At least for past releases some support of java is available on every architecture, not only for release architectures. A big advantage is that you don't have to use architecture specific build dependencies, but usually packages building architecture specific binary packages just work. That did ch

Re: Bug#754876: Virtual packages for the new Java runtimes

2014-07-15 Thread Bill Allombert
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:57:18PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 15/07/2014 16:22, Bill Allombert a écrit : > > > Could you please write the definition for each of them, and determine > > whether > > java1-runtime and java2-runtime should be kept ? > > Hi Bill, > > Here is the definition of

Java 9 dropping support for source/target level 1.5

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
This was expected but now it's effective, Java 9 no longer supports source/target level 1.5: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2014-July/000972.html So if you update a package and see these settings please bump them to 1.6. It might be interesting to add a Lintian warning when a ja

Re: Java 9 dropping support for source/target level 1.5

2014-07-15 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 15.07.2014 23:08, schrieb Emmanuel Bourg: > This was expected but now it's effective, Java 9 no longer supports > source/target level 1.5: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2014-July/000972.html > > So if you update a package and see these settings please bump them to 1.6. >

Re: Java 9 dropping support for source/target level 1.5

2014-07-15 Thread Rene Engelhard
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

Re: Java 9 dropping support for source/target level 1.5

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 15/07/2014 23:55, Matthias Klose a écrit : > No. Don't do it. This is complete bullshit for Debian at this point. We are > trying to prepare a release, working on a possible update to Java 8, and we > don't have the resources to work on Java 9 at this time. Ok, but could you say it nicely ple

Re: Trying to compile a package that depends on bouncycastle

2014-07-15 Thread Adam Spragg
Hi all, Well, thanks for all the help, but now I'm stuck on step the 9th, trying to compile SignApk.java. And I think I'm just going to give up. I'm getting compile errors of the form: SignApk.java:20: error: cannot find symbol import org.bouncycastle.asn1.ASN1ObjectIdentifier; Look, I've

Re: Java 9 dropping support for source/target level 1.5

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
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 in Jessie. What are the Java applications we want/need on these archs? We should probably document th

Re: RFS: openjfx/8u5-b13-1

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 14/07/2014 03:53, Miguel Landaeta a écrit : > openjfx is FTBFS due to a missing dependency on antlr3. Thank you for spotting this issue Miguel. I think I got caught by a dependency caching mechanism in Gradle, I had another non fatal error related to antlr instead. After deleting ~/.gradle I g

Re: java for jessie

2014-07-15 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 15/07/2014 17:48, Matthias Klose a écrit : > Providing security updates for released versions is tedious, and not many > people > are working on getting these updates into the oldstable and stable releases. > oldstable had only one openjdk version, stable unfortunately has two openjdk > versio

Re: RFS: felix-main 4.4.0-1 [RC] [UPLOADED]

2014-07-15 Thread tony mancill
Uploaded. Cheers, tony signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Bug#754876: Virtual packages for the new Java runtimes

2014-07-15 Thread tony mancill
On 07/15/2014 11:30 AM, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:57:18PM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: >> Le 15/07/2014 16:22, Bill Allombert a écrit : >> >>> Could you please write the definition for each of them, and determine >>> whether >>> java1-runtime and java2-runtime should be ke

Re: RFS: felix-framework 4.4.0-1 [UPLOADED]

2014-07-15 Thread tony mancill
On 07/14/2014 03:56 AM, Markus Koschany wrote: > Hello, > > here is the second part of the felix-* update. I updated felix-framework > to version 4.4.0 and I'm looking for a sponsor now. > > > Changelog: > > * Team upload. > * Imported Upstream version 4.4.0. > * Drop 01-java8-compatibility.pat