[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: For those who care about batik

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Vincent Fourmond <fourmond@debian.org> wrote:
> Onkar Shinde wrote:
>> As I was the one who updated batik in Ubuntu I want to ask few
>> comments about the differences between Ubuntu packaging and Debian
>> packaging. I haven't yet tried to build the package.
>> 1. Are you sure following change is correct -
>>  * Removing 02_fix_jar_target, no longer applicable
>> The reason I ask is because I refreshed that patch in Ubuntu. If you
>> remove that patch you end up with same class files in
>> batik-all-1.7.jar as well as batik-libs-1.7.jar files i.e. files that
>> should go only in batik-ext-1.7.jar will be included in
>> batik-libs-1.7.jar.
>  Thanks, I will need to have a deeper look at that - I'll pull the
> updated patch from Ubuntu, then.

Are you planning to fix this soon? I am planning to file a sync bug in
Ubuntu if all the changes mentioned here are done.

>> 2. You have not added 'xmlgraphics-commons-1.2' and 'xml-apis-ext' to
>> DEB_JARS. This is likely to cause build failure on build server. In
>> case I get enough time to verify it in pbuilder I will let you know.
>  Every single package I upload is built with pbuilder, so it builds
> fine. I'm not sure things are not missing, though, I will check to see
> if there are any differences if I add the jars for the build.
>> 3. Also Ubuntu version contains following symlinks which you may want
>> to add to Debian version as well.
>> batik-ext.jar -> batik-ext-1.7.jar
>> batik-libs.jar -> batik-libs-1.7.jar
>> batik-1.7.jar -> batik-all-1.7.jar
>> batik-all.jar -> batik-all-1.7.jar
>> batik.jar -> batik-all-1.7.jar
>  Most are already here (they are mandated by Debian Java Policy). Is
> the batik.jar and batik-1.7.jar links necessary ?

I believe batik.jar is necessary as we often use un-versioned name
when specifying the build classpath in debian/rules. Can't really
comment about batik-1.7.jar. I just followed the convention that was
present in 1.6 version.

Also while you are at it, you might also want to take a look at the
following bugs logged against Ubuntu's 1.7 version to fix them in
Debian version if possible.


Reply to: