Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime
In message: <20030120083327.GA17600@chrystal.opal.dhs.org>
Ola Lundqvist <opal@debian.org> writes:
>
>> If AWT / GUI stuff is a particular problem (which is my understanding),
>> I think it would make sense to define virtual packages java1-awt-runtime
>> (and possibly java2-swing-runtime).
>
>This is not a bad proposal at all. It would actually make some things easier.
>
>What do other people say about this?
I think it is good.
>They actually do not need the number in them. java-awt-runtime should
>be ok as there is no (correct?) difference between java1 and java2 when it
>comes to awt.
Incorrect. The AWT under 1.0.2, 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 all have various
differences with respect to which methods are available and/or
deprecated on many of the AWT objects. Many of the non-Sun
implementations of AWT don't even bother to declare (much less
implement) the deprecated methods, meaning that code written for
the 1.0.2 common denominator supported by most older web browsers
doesn't work.
>Same applies to swing, or?
Same problems with Swing, slightly simplified by the fact that it
didn't exist under 1.0.2.
- Alex
Reply to: