| 1 |
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 10:02:04AM -0400, David Stanek wrote: |
| 2 |
> Since dev-java/gnu-activation and dev-java/sun-jaf-bin actually |
| 3 |
> provide the same library, just different implementations, is this |
| 4 |
> a good candidate for a virtual package. Something like |
| 5 |
> virtual/java-activation? javamail is the same way a gnu version and |
| 6 |
> a sun binary version, and I am sure others exist. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I've not tested them properly, so I cannot vouch for their interoperability. |
| 9 |
In the meantime, ebuilds that need activation or javamail can do: |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
DEPEND="|| ( dev-java/gnu-activation dev-java/sun-jaf-bin)" |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If you have the time and inclination, drop by #gentoo-java or |
| 14 |
gentoo-java@l.g.o to help out with this kind of testing. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
One minor snack for thought: For as long as Sun keeps pumping out framework |
| 17 |
code that is non-redistributable, people will always reimplement their stuff. |
| 18 |
In the long run, this could lead to pollution of the virtual system for |
| 19 |
Gentoo. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Kind regards, |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Karl T |
Archives