Gentoo Archives: gentoo-java

From: Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew@××××××××××.org>
To: "Petteri Räty" <betelgeuse@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-java@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-java] OpenJDK, IcedTea and Package Naming
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 17:08:14
Message-Id: 17c6771e0809121008t3ae0e1fbi61180e90571ff318@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-java] OpenJDK, IcedTea and Package Naming by "Petteri Räty"
1 2008/9/12 Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@g.o>:
2 > Andrew John Hughes kirjoitti:
3 >>
4 >> For those who hate the aboration of having the version number as part
5 >> of the package name, note that this is intended to be short-lived.
6 >> As the discussion above implies, the OpenJDK6 tree is a stop-gap,
7 >> created to fulfill the need for a complete implementation now.
8 >> When 1.7 is released, IcedTea will become the primary JDK again and
9 >> IcedTea6 will cease development. At present, most of the
10 >> maintenance work for OpenJDK6/IcedTea6 is being done by the IcedTea
11 >> hackers; Sun only have Joe Darcy working on this. Their
12 >> concentration is on 1.7. Thus, we should really note our appreciation
13 >> of this work by naming the IcedTea project rather than
14 >> hiding it under the name OpenJDK.
15 >>
16 >
17 > A good post and hopefully useful to readers out there but my main concern
18 > really wasn't the issue of openjdk vs. icedtea but your choice of naming it
19 > icedtea6 and icedtea (Debian like) instead of doing it the Gentoo way with
20 > slots.
21 >
22
23 I didn't include this issue because I believed we'd already discussed it ages
24 ago and I'm surprised to see it come up again. There is nothing Debian-like
25 about the naming - in fact, Debian has only packaged IcedTea6 recently,
26 and does so as OpenJDK - I mentioned this in my original e-mail. It is
27 Sun who refer to it as OpenJDK6 or even open6, in the same manner as JDK7, etc.
28
29 Anyway, what I'm saying is that this isn't a name change simply based
30 on versions
31 but these are completely different projects. There have different source trees
32 and can be in completely different states, depending on what has been
33 merged between
34 the two. More practically, there would be version number clashes with
35 keeping them
36 both in a 'icedtea' directory, IcedTea 1.7 appearing to be later than
37 IcedTea6 1.2 for one.
38
39 >> With Gentoo, the presence of USE flags and local
40 >> settings
41 >> mean that we don't know what will result from the ebuild in binary
42 >> form. Some builds will be roughly equivalent to the builds in Fedora,
43 >> Debian
44 >> and Ubuntu, but some may not. There is functionality in IcedTea, such
45 >> as the ability to use CACAO instead of HotSpot, that would mean
46 >> the resulting binary does not qualify to be called OpenJDK (such
47 >> packages are called cacao-oj6 in Debian and Ubuntu for example).
48 >
49 > I think we can solve this by having a virtual openjdk ebuild using use deps
50 > that will force a certain set of features on the icedtea ebuild.
51 >
52
53 I don't have a problem with that. Better still, make this a binary and consider
54 applying for TCK access to certify it. This will definitely be needed on lower
55 spec. machines that will struggle to build IcedTea. Think in terms of
56 OpenOffice.org... ;)
57
58 > Regards,
59 > Petteri
60 >
61 >
62 >
63
64
65
66 --
67 Andrew :-)
68
69 Support Free Java!
70 Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
71 http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
72 http://openjdk.java.net
73
74 PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
75 Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-java] OpenJDK, IcedTea and Package Naming "Petteri Räty" <betelgeuse@g.o>