Re: Use of update-alternatives or JAVA_HOME
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:39:55PM +0200, Jan Schulz wrote:
> Reply to the list, as I suspect, that you just missed the right key :)
> At least I haven't found anything private in this mail
I did not, in fact, miss the right key. I replied privately because I was
responding to a private message from you, and it is generally impolite to
reply publicly to a private message (as you have done here, though in this
case no harm has been done).
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:58:18 +0200
From: Jan Schulz <jasc.usenet@gmx.de>
To: Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org>
Subject: Re: Use of update-alternatives or JAVA_HOME
> * Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> >Of course you can. You just create a new alternative called java1.4, and
> >only JREs which can provide that capability register themselves as
> >alternatives for it.
>
> That would be fine. Problem is, that you would have more problems with
> it, because most programms are fine with /path/to/java, but not with
> /usr/bin/java-1.4.
If a program is fine with 'java', it can be trivially modified to
accept 'java-1.4' in its place, and indeed, if it requires a recent version
of java, that would be preferable.
> If someone finds this usefull, I can write a proposel for this to be
> included in the debian java policy. This won't be until end of august,
> though, I will go on holidays on friday...
I think that would be excellent.
--
- mdz
Reply to: