Your message dated Mon, 12 Apr 2010 17:37:54 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line java-package has been removed from Debian unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #358237,
regarding make-jpkg should create two .deb files instead of one
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
358237: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=358237
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: java-package
Version: 0.27
Severity: wishlist
Java is intended to be architecture-independent. This architecture
independence is achieved through architecture-dependent JREs and JDKs.
However, much of the contents of JRE and JDK packages created by
make-jpkg are architecture-independent. I believe that putting all the
contents of a tarball (or other downloaded file) into an indivisible
blob of a .deb file is not an optimal way to package non-free JREs and
JDKs for Debian or Ubuntu. The architecture-dependent bits and the
architecture-independent bits should go into separate packages.
Packages of the GNU Java implementation already have such a
modularization. GCJ largely represents the architecture-independent
bits of that implementation, and GIJ the architecture-dependent ones.
AFAIK, GIJ is fully compatible with the architecture-dependent bits of
Sun JREs and JDKs as a drop-in replacement for them, but GCJ will not
be compatible as a drop-in replacement for their
architecture-independent bits for the foreseeable future. If someone
downloaded a Sun JRE or JDK and used make-jpkg to create two packages
from it (for purposes of this discussion, let's call them sun_i386 and
sun_all), they would be able to install GIJ and sun_all, thus creating
a hybrid environment from the aggregation of free and non-free
software. I believe this would lead to the more widespread adoption of
GIJ, especially on architectures Sun does not support, and as a result,
PowerPC users would have another alternative to IBM's
less-than-reasonable licensing terms, ARM users would not be limited to
a 1.3.1 JRE or JDK if they wanted Sun compatibility, and other people
would benefit in other similar ways. In turn, the greater proliferation
of GIJ should generate greater interest in GCJ. I would be very
interested in any arguments against making java-package enable this to
happen. Thank you.
--
"Consider that two wrongs never make a right, but that three do."
--National Lampoon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
the package has been removed. That is why the bugs cannot be fixed anymore.
Cheers,
Torsten
--- End Message ---
