Re: Use of update-alternatives or JAVA_HOME
Hallo Matt,
* Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>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).
Sorry, my fault! Changed muttrc to not let this happen again...
>> * Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>> 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.
Any comments from others? Any problems with this?
>> 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.
Maybe I find some time this week still, then I will send out the mail.
Unfortunatelly I won't have any debian at home, so no code, just plain
mail...
Jan
--
Jan Schulz jasc@gmx.net
"Wer nicht fragt, bleibt dumm."
Reply to: