"Michael Koch" <konqueror@gmx.de> wrote in message [🔎] 20051019052310.GG12393@asterix.konqueror.de">news:[🔎] 20051019052310.GG12393@asterix.konqueror.de...
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 04:55:07PM -0400, Joe Smith wrote:Michael said: >The second option was done long ago, originally for Fedora. > It would be the best if Eclipse.org just moved up to tomcat5. The moredebian's eclipse deviates from upsteam the more of a pain it is on both thedebian maintainer and on upstream.We used tomcat5 when packaging Eclipse 3.1(.1) as its the only version we can bring into Debian main. Upstream still uses tomcat4 due to some reasons. We cant from the legal point of view.
I understand that. What I was saying is that it seemed odd that upstream had not done this. It may be a wise dea to prod upstream and see if they will update for 3.2. I doubt the breakage is too severe.
Also is the tomcat package in debian formated correctly to be seen by eclipse? As far as I know Eclipse's tomcat has the plugin metadata included, which i doubt a 'native' tomcat would have.
Also, I have half-heartedly followed the drama relating to getting eclipse 3.X in Debian. However there are a few small things i seem to have missed.
The new packages run on kaffe? (it sounds that way, If you used a different free jvm them just 's/kaffe/[name of other JVM]/' for the following questions.)
Did you remove the depends on an 'offical' JVM, or do 'kaffe|...'?If you removed the depends on the 'offical' JVM rather than make it a choice, please reconsider. Explanation: I have a JVM from sun installed on my system solely for reasons of practicallity. Since I already have that installed, and that is known to run Eclipse just fine, I do not want to waste space downloading kaffe.