Barry Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The JDKs are packaged by make-jpkg are non-free, and as such, we do not > tamper with the javac, java, etc. commands of any vendor's JRE/JDK. > People expect that sort of thing to be left the way the vendor made it, > and currently (for better or worse) a java command from any of them does > not attempt to set JAVA_HOME or other environmental variables itself.
Basically what I'm wondering is what should our Java packaging policy be related to packages requiring java2-compiler to build. Should they check for the existence of a non-free compiler which requires the JAVA_HOME or can they just assume the behaviour of say jikes? I think this should be consistent and documented in the policy so that both the maintainers and users are on the same page. Currently the situation is that I could blindly go and close the same bug against JSPWiki by simply saying that java2-compiler should not require any extra environment to work and if some non-free implementation does require that, it is not a problem of a free Debian package. I'm not entirely comfortable with that and that's why I would like it be consistently either JAVA_HOME supported or not. -- * Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) * * PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *
