[gentoo-java] unsubscribe

[Ezio Bernaudo]

Alle 21:52, lunedì 31 luglio 2006, Joshua Nichols ha scritto:
> Daniel wrote:
> > Hi,
> > the installation of Java on Gentoo is the hell on earth!
>
> I'm sure lots of people would disagree. In fact, I do hear fairly often
> that our support of Java very good.
>
> > - the installation is non transparent
>
> Care to elaborate? If you emerge java packages, things should just work,
> ie the appropriate JDK will be pulled for building.
>
> > - the java-"help"-utils (java-config, java-config-wrapper) are not
> > acceptable, because you don't really need them
>
> How are they not acceptable? They are absolutely necessary actually, as
> they are used for configuring and building Java on Gentoo
>
> > - the whole solution of installing more than one jdk is bumptious - so
> > not easy
> > handable
>
> I... really don't get what you saying. According to the handy
> dictionary.reference.com site, bumptious means 'Crudely or loudly
> assertive; pushy.' I don't really how supporting multiple JDKs is pushy
> or supportive. It just offers a lot more flexibility. In particular, it
> gives a lot of power when it come time for a new Java release, such that
> we can use the stable and widely used version, while all the issues with
> various packages are being worked out with the new version.
>
> > This meens that it takes long time to install java and that you need to
> > do some
> > terrible thinks (e.g. unmasking some packages ... see
> > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/java/java-upgrade.xml).
>
> Terrible thinks? It is a new system for handling Java.... so of course
> it needs to be in testing keywords. Or perhaps would you prefer it were
> marked stable and then have all sorts of fun breakages for our stable
> packages? No one forces you to unmask anything. Most times people using
> stable keywords run into the new Java system because they decided to
> package.unmask Java 1.5. (And please note, there is a difference between
> using testing keywords, ie ~x86, and using stuff in package.mask... the
> latter are known to cause problems or are undergoing heavy testing)
>
> > This is not the way gentoo should go because this is to heavy for the
> > user (that mostly just wants to install a jdk :) )!
>
> If you don't have anything Java related installed, you can just emerge
> the JDK. If you do have Java stuff installed, chances are you already
> have one installed, and nothing is stopping you from emerging a
> different one.
>
> > So I have collected some points _we_ should think about:
> > - why is jdk-1.5 still under development?
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/java/tiger-faq.xml should spell out some
> of it. And I'm not sure what you mean by under development. I presume
> you mean testing keywords? If so, this is standard policy, because it
> 1.5 has only recently come out of package.mask.
>
> > - is it really necessary to install an jdk-1.4 and jdk-1.5? - if yes, why
> > you don't need to install jdk-1.3?
>
> Yes, it REALLY is necessary. First off, some packages are known to break
> with Java 1.5. These will eventually can be patched. Second, every
> package not using the new Java system needs to be built with Java 1.4 to
> avoid the problems mentioned in the FAQ. It isn't necessary to install
> 1.3 because apparently, everything works with Java 1.4 that worked with
> Java 1.3.
>
> > - gentoo should never make a difference between jdk 1.4 and 1.5
>
> Um... no. There does need to be a difference. I'm going to assume that
> you just aren't familar enough with the differences between the two.
> Just a few points:
>
> * There is a different version of bytecode between major revisions of
> JDKs, ie from 1.3 to 1.4, 1.4 to 1.5. Bytecode is forward compatible (ie
> use 1.4 bytecode in 1.5 JRE), but not backward compatible.
> * There is a new keyword, enum. Therefore, code using enum as a variable
> code fails to compile
> * Java 1.5 has new APIs for XML at least. It introduces new abstract
> methods on some abstract classes and interfaces. The result is that when
> classes fail to compile which use these abstract classes and interfaces,
> and haven't specifically update to support the new API
>
> > - java-config should just generate some environment files to set a
> > special vm
>
> What's a special VM?
>
> > - if an ebuild requires a special vm (why ever, because the api of the
> > jdk is compatible in most points) it should gnerate a warning, that the
> > vm should be set to 1.x
>
> See my previous points about compatibility.
>
> > - it is the problem of the user if there are two java applications which
> > need different vms (this problem is much easier to solve than installing
> > java ;)).
>
> The new Java system actually handles this. We basically create
> 'launchers' for this, which read information about the packages it
> needs, and figures out if it can run in the current VM. If it doesn't,
> it will switch to one.
>
> > I hope you will not understand this bug as an act of aggression - it
> > should just help Gentoo.
>
> I hope you understand that it is easy to misunderstand comments to the
> effect of 'Java on Gentoo being hell on earth' as being aggressive.
>
> --
> Joshua Nichols
> Gentoo/Java - Project Lead

-- 
gentoo-java@g.o mailing list