Re: STOP INCLUDING EXTERNAL JARS IN YOUR JAVA PACKAGES!
On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 11:51:40AM -0800, Kevin A. Burton wrote:
> > s/doesn't/does/ ?
>
> yup... sorry :( should have been does
> <snip>
:)
> > Yes that is what you have to do. Libbar-1.1.1 needs to be a package with that
> > name so an upgrade does not introduce conflicts. I think the new proposed java
> > policy adresses this quite good.
>
> Is there a link to the new proposed policy.. I think I saw it posted but can't
> remember where I put it :(
> <snip>
>
> <snip>
>
> > > Are you saying that .WAR files are also incorrect?
> >
> > Yes they are most probably incorrect.
>
> ... perhaps on debian systems. It does make it easy to deploy java
> applications especially if you want to be as 100% java as possible.
>
> I don't think we will get past this issue though. The WAR approach does allow
> one VM to load code from multiple places due to the classloader approach.
>
> If we want to push this 100% we will have to use a more modern classloader (IMO
> the standard classloader suck).
>
> > > Just because it isn't the UNIX approach doesn't make it incorrect.
> > >
> > > I have an Open Mind (TM) on the subject so I am listening... Explain why
> > > the Servlet WAR spec is incorrect and how it could be done better.
> > > (Specifically WRT the WEB-INF/lib approach).
> >
> > Wars are not needed if you have deb packages.
>
> Not necessarilly. In the above scenario they are needed.
No it is not needed. See below.
> > Why have a packaging system (and a very bad one not allowing symlinks) inside
> > an other packaging system?
>
> There are advantages. Again nothing is black and white. :)
>
> > You can use simple directories instead of the war files. :)
>
> I don't understand???
> <snip>
You say that the war-files allow the classloading. That is not entirely
true. Take tomcat for example.
* You place a war-file in the specified directory.
* Restart tomcat.
* Tomcat now unzips this file to the webapp directory.
* Tomcat is started and uses the directories that has the WEB-INF dirs
and more.
Conclusion: The war-file is not used directly. It is mearly unzipped and
because we have a deb arproach in debian the war-files is not needed.
War files have a major disadvantage and that is that they are simple zip-
archives which means that they will not support symbolic links.
I think we should cover the war-files in the policy too.
They should be avoided, right?
Regards,
// Ola
> - --
> Kevin A. Burton ( burton@apache.org, burton@openprivacy.org, burtonator@acm.org )
> Location - San Francisco, CA, Cell - 415.595.9965
> Jabber - burtonator@jabber.org, Web - http://relativity.yi.org/
>
> Resistance is *not* futile!
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt
>
> iD8DBQE77C+QAwM6xb2dfE0RAu2GAKDRLpPrG+kfJXbykxflueaQLyecgQCgiRLj
> ZMGGVdzAeEaN1VIMt1Dacn4=
> =/hOr
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
--
--------------------- Ola Lundqvist ---------------------------
/ opal@debian.org Björnkärrsgatan 5 A.11 \
| opal@lysator.liu.se 584 36 LINKÖPING |
| +46 (0)13-17 69 83 +46 (0)70-332 1551 |
| http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 |
\ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 /
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to: