Re: Policy change proposal, Re: Bug#176628: sablevm: package incorrctly provides java1-runtime
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:34:20AM -0800, T. Alexander Popiel wrote:
> 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.
Ohh well...
> >Same applies to swing, or?
>
> Same problems with Swing, slightly simplified by the fact that it
> didn't exist under 1.0.2.
Ohh my. Well we could enfoce that even depricated functions has to
be at least declared.
Regards,
// Ola
> - Alex
>
>
> --
> 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 Annebergsslingan 37 \
| opal@lysator.liu.se 654 65 KARLSTAD |
| +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +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: