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 > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-03-2008, 08:42 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Multilib Middle-Ground

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

Les Mikesell wrote:

In fact, I don't
see any reason any java code needs to be specialized for a
distribution or included in its own repository. Why not just make
fedora work with an external repo for java that works across
distributions/versions and avoid the issue entirely instead of
shipping something that isn't quite java? Even when a real java can
be included, what is the point of having specialized distro/version
packages of the apps that don't need specialization?


There is no "specialization" usually necessary for including software in
the repository.


Why does jpackage.org have all those separate repository entries for
different distros/versions if they could all be the same?


Fedora avoids specialization by being close to upstream
usually. Relying on a external repository for Java would mean that we
can't include any Java programs within Fedora.


I'm very agnostic about where something comes from. Why should anyone
care about that?


Parts of Openoffice.org,
Eclipse and dozens of programs were introduced into the repository
because of the work that went into GCJ, classpath etc and even OpenJDK
has benefited from that now.


Being 'introduced to your repository' isn't particularly interesting to
me. I'd much prefer to not be trapped by what happens to fit your
policy this week. Why not include the config for the jpackage repo and
let yum sort out where things come from?


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 08:52 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Multilib Middle-Ground

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:

Le samedi 03 mai 2008 à 01:01 -0500, Les Mikesell a écrit :

One complaint is that it subverts something obviously intended to be a
per-process choice into a per-machine configuration. What do you do if
you, or different users, need to simultaneously run different versions
of JVM's


You write the bits needed to support switching jvms at the user level
via environment variables, and you submit them to jpp for merge in
jpackage-utils. This has been explicitely marked as a welcome
enhancement for five years

http://www.jpackage.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/rpms/free/jpackage-utils/doc/jpackage-1.5-policy.xhtml?revision=1.2&root=jpackage&pathrev=MA IN#id2493509

I guess none of the people who need it want to write a line of shell
script.



Where does the alternatives system expose the information that you would
need to do this?


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 08:53 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Multilib Middle-Ground

On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
> Being 'introduced to your repository' isn't particularly interesting to me.
> I'd much prefer to not be trapped by what happens to fit your policy this
> week. Why not include the config for the jpackage repo and let yum sort out
> where things come from?


It is extremely doubtful that will be including any configurations for
any 3rd party repositories by default based solely on legal liability
issues. If the repository isn't directly under the control of the
fedora project so that we can pull packages as necessary for any legal
reasons which come up..then we are most lilely not going to include it
by default...regardless of its contents.

-jef

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-03-2008, 09:25 PM
Emmanuel Seyman
 
Default Multilib Middle-Ground

* Les Mikesell [03/05/2008 23:16] :
>
> I'd much prefer to not be trapped by what happens to fit your policy this
> week.

The only solution here is to create your own distribution. You then get
to define policy and thus, that it always fits your needs to the letter.

Emmanuel

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31 PM.

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