Re: Which JVM can I use?
Christian T. Steigies wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Apr 1999, Michael Schmitz wrote:
>
> > I suggest you read the Developers Reference if you are interested how the
> > Debian project works. The existence of packages in the distribution that
> I hope this wasnt ment for me ;-)
ROTFL ...
> > I don't recall ever seeing error messages about guavac depending on a JVM
> > which doesn't exist, and I don't recall the slink-CD maintainer ever
> > complaining about this either. guavac doesn't depend on anything but libc
> > and libstdc++, so I guess that was OK. The error would be on part of the
> > guavac maintainer.
>
> Suggests: java-virtual-machine
> ^^^^^^^^^ I think he was talking about this one. Yes, he should read the
> developers reference.
No, I'd hope the meaning of these control fields is explained in some
other Debian FAQ ...
> I didnt want to make things worse than they are... probably we have more
> than 1500 packages, I recall a number of 2500 somehow...
> But I forgot Nick in my calculation, so I would say there are 6 porters, more
> or less active.
I dunno what you are counting there - kullervo down, Roman's TT down,
Dave Cook's Falcon down, I'm unsure on Nick and Chris. Leaves
cookie-monster (seems still alive) and your Amiga.
> Maybe there should be a weekly FAQ or so? Containing things like where to
> find XF86Config and why not to change it. What to do when a user finds a
> problem with a package, dependency or runtime problems. Why to read the
> docs, etc, etc. Maybe somebody who has successfully set up debian/m68k wants
> to write something like this? I dont think any of the 3 or maybe 6 porters
> has the time to write something like this. And again, this requires no
> programming skills. Sombody want to step forward? I guess the handfull of
> porters would be able to spend a little time on double checking that the
> contents is ok (I didnt check with the others though, hope they wont hurt me
> too hard ;-)
I'd cross check a FAQ if someone writes one. If I had time for writing
FAQs
it would be spent on the Mac FAQ first. I'd contribute my short list of
important URLs to read, but that's about all.
> > With the current glibc 2.1 situation, things will get _really_
> > interesting.
> Yup. And the current kullervo situation makes is _REALLY_ interesting :-(
Don't even mention it.
Michael
Reply to: