FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Java

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-07-2008, 06:49 AM
Michael Koch
 
Default icedtea status?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 07:40:57AM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> 2008/1/6, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
> [...]
> > I have to say I agree with Petter. I would say that stuff can go to main
> > when it works on one or two or three archs and not others with free
> > runtimes. Runtimes will get bug reports that stuff dont works on certain
> > platforms and people will work on this. This will encourage even more
> > people...
>
> I don't agree and I think it's a sort of lie. There has been two or
> three years that we agreed to take gcj as our reference free vm. A
> package that could be built and run with gcj is considered completely
> free and can move to main. Now, if we move every packages to main
> because they can be built and run with openjdk, we send a bad message
> to our users.

You know that even GCJ is not working on all our platforms? Given that
fact we have to move *all* Java packages to contrib. Thats not really
what we want.

> Anyway, Michael, thanks for working on Icedtea and I will not waste
> time to send bug reports on packages that moved to main but should
> IMHO remain in contrib.

I understand, but do we really have other possible ways?


Cheers,
Michael


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 07:29 AM
Michael Koch
 
Default icedtea status?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 03:23:25PM +0930, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2008 2:40 AM, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > I work on icedtea package currently. There are some issues taht I can
> > hopefully sort out this week.
>
> Could you please take over the RFP then?
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/452750

Done.

> Also, the Ubuntu packaging is in pkg-java SVN, will you be maintaining it there?

No, thats an old version. We are maintaining the common icedtea package
for Debian and Ubuntu at https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-java/uj/icedtea7.


Cheers,
Michael


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 08:22 AM
"Arnaud Vandyck"
 
Default icedtea status?

2008/1/7, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
[...]
> You know that even GCJ is not working on all our platforms?

Yes I know and for those platforms, I don't see a problem moving the
package to main because there were no alternative before icedtea.

> Given that fact we have to move *all* Java packages to contrib.
> Thats not really what we want.

No, I don't want that and that's not what I'm trying to explain ;-)

> > Anyway, Michael, thanks for working on Icedtea and I will not waste
> > time to send bug reports on packages that moved to main but should
> > IMHO remain in contrib.
>
> I understand, but do we really have other possible ways?

Not moving packages that work only with icedtea to main at the moment.

--
Arnaud Vandyck


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 08:49 AM
"Egon Willighagen"
 
Default icedtea status?

On Jan 7, 2008 10:22 AM, Arnaud Vandyck <avdyk@debian.org> wrote:
> 2008/1/7, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
> > I understand, but do we really have other possible ways?
>
> Not moving packages that work only with icedtea to main at the moment.

What are the timelines of IcedTea and gcj with respect to the next
Debian release?

Out of curiosity (haven't been keeping as tuned in as I would have liked):

Has IcedTea (IT) matured enough to be ready before the next Debian
release, and would it therefore make sense to replace gcj with IT as
default JVM? For example, it is reasonable to expect IT to be ported
to the same platforms as gcj currently has? What are the plans of the
gcj (/Classpath) community with respect to coverage of the J5/6
language? That is, what advantages does IT have over gcj (and vice
versa), now and in, say, 6 months?

Egon

--
----
http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 11:14 AM
Andrew Haley
 
Default icedtea status?

Egon Willighagen writes:
> On Jan 7, 2008 10:22 AM, Arnaud Vandyck <avdyk@debian.org> wrote:
> > 2008/1/7, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
> > > I understand, but do we really have other possible ways?
> >
> > Not moving packages that work only with icedtea to main at the moment.
>
> What are the timelines of IcedTea and gcj with respect to the next
> Debian release?
>
> Out of curiosity (haven't been keeping as tuned in as I would have
> liked):
>
> Has IcedTea (IT) matured enough to be ready before the next Debian
> release, and would it therefore make sense to replace gcj with IT
> as default JVM? For example, it is reasonable to expect IT to be
> ported to the same platforms as gcj currently has?

Yes, it is reasonable, but it'll be some time before it's ready.
IcedTea is good on x86 Linux, and it runs OK on PPC, but is
interpreter only. Getting good performence with IcedTea on all the
platforms to which gcj has been ported will be harder.

> What are the plans of the gcj (/Classpath) community with respect
> to coverage of the J5/6 language?

gcj is already v5 language compatible, and the library is complete
enough for general use.

> That is, what advantages does IT have over gcj (and vice versa),
> now and in, say, 6 months?

The core problem with IcedTea at the present time is that it's *too*
advanced: it's a pre-release of Java 1.7. To quote the README,

"At this time the build from which IcedTea was constructed corresponds
to an early build of JDK 7. When JDK 7 is complete it will implement
the Java SE 7 Platform Specification. Work on that specification is
underway, but far from final. Any APIs in the JDK 7 implementation,
whether new or old, are therefore subject to minor adjustments, major
revisions, or even outright removal between now and the time that the
Java SE 7 Platform Specification is finalized."

Andrew.

--
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 11:18 AM
Andrew Haley
 
Default icedtea status?

Andrew Haley writes:

> gcj is already v5 language compatible, and the library is complete
> enough for general use.

Actually, that's not *strictly* true. The more recently released gcj
is based on on the Java 1.4, but Fedora and a bunch of other distros
are shipping pre-releases of the next gcj.

Andrew.

--
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 01:07 PM
Andrew Haley
 
Default icedtea status?

Michael Koch writes:
> On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 10:22:42AM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> > 2008/1/7, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
> > [...]
> > > You know that even GCJ is not working on all our platforms?
> >
> > Yes I know and for those platforms, I don't see a problem moving the
> > package to main because there were no alternative before icedtea.
> >
> > > Given that fact we have to move *all* Java packages to contrib.
> > > Thats not really what we want.
> >
> > No, I don't want that and that's not what I'm trying to explain ;-)
> >
> > > > Anyway, Michael, thanks for working on Icedtea and I will not waste
> > > > time to send bug reports on packages that moved to main but should
> > > > IMHO remain in contrib.
> > >
> > > I understand, but do we really have other possible ways?
> >
> > Not moving packages that work only with icedtea to main at the moment.
>
> I agree that we have to take care when moving from contrib to main and
> that we have problems when some package in main works *only* with
> icedtea. IMO it is a good policy to file bugs against not working runtimes
> in this case so people know the problems and can work on them.

OK, but please also post gcj failures to java@gcc.gnu.org. At least,
thing that don't buld with the latest gcj. I can't promise we'll fix
everything, of course.

Andrew.

--
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 01:07 PM
Michael Koch
 
Default icedtea status?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 10:22:42AM +0100, Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> 2008/1/7, Michael Koch <konqueror@gmx.de>:
> [...]
> > You know that even GCJ is not working on all our platforms?
>
> Yes I know and for those platforms, I don't see a problem moving the
> package to main because there were no alternative before icedtea.
>
> > Given that fact we have to move *all* Java packages to contrib.
> > Thats not really what we want.
>
> No, I don't want that and that's not what I'm trying to explain ;-)
>
> > > Anyway, Michael, thanks for working on Icedtea and I will not waste
> > > time to send bug reports on packages that moved to main but should
> > > IMHO remain in contrib.
> >
> > I understand, but do we really have other possible ways?
>
> Not moving packages that work only with icedtea to main at the moment.

I agree that we have to take care when moving from contrib to main and
that we have problems when some package in main works *only* with
icedtea. IMO it is a good policy to file bugs against not working runtimes
in this case so people know the problems and can work on them. Currently
thats not done because most people dont use/test packages from contrib.
E.g. Lucas' autobuilder only checks main (for good reasons). We loose
more then we win when stuff just stays in contrib. We need to actively
work on it.


Cheers,
Michael


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 04:11 PM
"Eric Lavarde - Debian"
 
Default icedtea status?

Hi,

> >
> > I agree that we have to take care when moving from contrib to main and
> > that we have problems when some package in main works *only* with
> > icedtea. IMO it is a good policy to file bugs against not working
> runtimes
> > in this case so people know the problems and can work on them.
>
> OK, but please also post gcj failures to java@gcc.gnu.org. At least,
> thing that don't buld with the latest gcj. I can't promise we'll fix
> everything, of course.
Could we get those things officialized and documented somewhere (Debian's
Wiki? Java Policy?) before it disappears in the depths of the mailing
list?

Eric

--
Eric de France, d'Allemagne et de Navarre


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-07-2008, 05:47 PM
Michael Koch
 
Default icedtea status?

On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 06:11:00PM +0100, Eric Lavarde - Debian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > >
> > > I agree that we have to take care when moving from contrib to main and
> > > that we have problems when some package in main works *only* with
> > > icedtea. IMO it is a good policy to file bugs against not working
> > runtimes
> > > in this case so people know the problems and can work on them.
> >
> > OK, but please also post gcj failures to java@gcc.gnu.org. At least,
> > thing that don't buld with the latest gcj. I can't promise we'll fix
> > everything, of course.

Yes, definitely. Reporting to upstream is important.

> Could we get those things officialized and documented somewhere (Debian's
> Wiki? Java Policy?) before it disappears in the depths of the mailing
> list?

Before we document something we need to decide something. Or do you want
to document the different opinions and who said what?


Cheers,
Michael


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:25 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org