Bug#136993: binfmt-support: package javawrapper somewhere
Actually, does either javawrapper or even jarwrapper make sense these days now that openjdk already register jar files in binfmts? Granted, jarwrapper does at least one thing better than openjdk: it provides a proper jar detector, while openjdk relies only on magic numbers. Which matches not only .jar files but *any* zip file, including its subclasses like MS Office's docx / xlsx / etc. So, I wonder if jar/javawrapper could be merged into openjdk? If only to make its binfmts entry a little more robust with a detector? I detailed this issue in bug #706200, and I even describe (and suggest) jarwrapper's approach., so maybe joining efforts is a good idea? Regards, ML -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/debian-bugs-dist
Bug#136993: binfmt-support: package javawrapper somewhere
file. This still seems as though it could be useful in some situations= =2E =20 CCing the javatools maintainers; would it be possible to merge some of the functionality of http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~cjwatson/code/javawrapper/javawrappe= r-1.0.tar.gz into jarwrapper? =20 Thanks, =20 Hi again Sorry for the late reply. It is possible add this feature to jarwrapper, but I am not sure that it make sense these days. Personally I hardly ever run a class directly; either my IDE start the program for me or I bundle it into a jar first. On a related note, the Debian Java Policy requires that all class files are bundled into jar files, so it will not add any value for Java packaging. I do not mind supporting this if our users actually want this feature. ~Niels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#136993: binfmt-support: package javawrapper somewhere
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 08:35:14PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote: I noticed this very old bug and wondered if it is still relevant. Currently there is a jarwrapper package that uses binfmt-support to allow jar-files to be executed. Almost. It's probably more use to most people than my javawrapper implementation is, I agree. When I wrote javawrapper, it was in the early days of Java and it was still common enough to just build a pile of .class files rather than a .jar file. I wrote javawrapper because I was fed up with concocting the correct syntax to get the Java interpreter to start with a given .class file. This still seems as though it could be useful in some situations. CCing the javatools maintainers; would it be possible to merge some of the functionality of http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~cjwatson/code/javawrapper/javawrapper-1.0.tar.gz into jarwrapper? Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@debian.org] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#136993: binfmt-support: package javawrapper somewhere
Hi I noticed this very old bug and wondered if it is still relevant. Currently there is a jarwrapper package that uses binfmt-support to allow jar-files to be executed. ~Niels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
