Hamish Moffatt kiedys napisal:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 08:22:31AM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Monday 31 October 2005 05:28, Dalibor Topic wrote:
>> > The packagers used a specific free runtime to make the eclipse package
>> > build and work, so they made that runtime specifically part of the
>> > dependencies, as that's a configuration the packagers can focus on to
>> > support.
>> > You are most welcome to contribute, and help improve the eclipse
>> > packages.
>> This does _not_ make a lot of sense. It would make much more sense to
>> suggest gcj/gij
>> and depend on java-virtual-machine. This leaves it up the the user to
>> decide if he can
>> use a non-free jvm. I my case many of the apps I use (non-debian) fail
>> with the free
>> jvms. In short this type of depends is, IMO a bug. It will force me,
>> and many others, to bypass the packaging system, which is usually a bad
> Your argument is only reasonable if your non-free Java environment is a
> complete drop-in replacement for building and running Eclipse.
> If not, then you're asking for extra work to be done to support multiple
> JVMs. If that's what you need, patches are probably welcome.
Maybe not. Original (downloaded) Eclipse version works with both gcj/gij and
Sun JDK. And I think that with Sable and kaffe it could also work wothout
patching as far as I know. Maybe when all Eclipse packages will be
available, I will repack it and try with each virtual machine.
Registered Linux User 369908