Re: Clear definition of default-java and its scope
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2010-12-08 21:18, Torsten Werner wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Matthias Klose <doko@ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> No. This should not be done. Relying on an alternative for a build makes
>> problems much harder to debug, if you first have to find out which
>> alternative is actually used, and which alternative is used for the build.
>>
>> I am fine with improving user experience, but the change in the proposed
>> form will obfuscate the build process.
>
> Niels did not propose to use alternatives for building packages. His
> proposal is fully backwards compatible as far as I understood it.
>
> Torsten
>
>
Yes, the idea is that default-java remains what it always has been for
us; namely the default implementation used for building (complete with
the standard symlink).
The "change" is to introduce a new symlink as well (next to the
default-java symlink) which is an "alternative" that by default points
to default-java, but can be updated.
~Niels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJM//c1AAoJEAVLu599gGRCq9EP/1GFNqBN1Qj0Xmy/RcXm5C06
g9BBttSzNNTUdJ4B8fu/DiyPRW7cL4ssWGP49wl69FqsIfFrdA8oYnP6RXAbHTJr
t5ueN6ns83/gJLZZRHdtj5AfETRPDWBOOY0PMxaQKC+jPVwsrdfvnAStVg2U8Ju3
rr2JZ1xo8beW0uPVnLuo+qrEscUvMUD3p4wAh/CTUGCliOwgzVBgrSmnqf03Hs/O
wgVV05jZiRBmwtcK545vANL0zslmFKdP8H3j1RAQ0FzufO2pP3NryMCqVkyl9Nun
/vYJTRnTyIlQw/sy5I39AY3ga0OhjZFfMxZjhsFpadE+io3jQ96qdIjpgyVxWuJC
cwXp7KaNCh0Hv9KqcUcv5m+TpNyw7ITkBUALj1eKZKIYYwg7QpjEpP7iqWXszGt8
24Z+cMkLWQvmJXlpsURhp9VXMyQiidevdhAgKmDfks5uarYB/KHw5MjpyThxD8Fj
cf/dqjB5jdHDQ6tIS3RnERjMc7ECnfrI2ewjv5Jj3EKGTB6P/eMwjjQMJ2yvkdU6
CalcmKuoVnjocbcQj6EmcucX1p636+AL0UZctxGgXZqDnhURegaf7WNxtLbaeXod
nbfcVaCMgz8nE0OCxP/7gyRfg2pv4k2akYDJOLVGZrgzvPmZ7XSJPTfhIX68e7Vy
ImNaXTmhefNiz86fBNuO
=G0IE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: