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

Re: RFS: UPDATE: libbasicplayer-java 3.0-4

Hash: SHA1

أحمد المحمودي wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:43:22PM -0500, Varun Hiremath wrote:
>> Ahmed, thanks for fixing the package. But, I think library packages
>> should at least depend on the -jre-headless package. AFAIK, that has
>> been the general practice with other library packages in Debian.
> ---end quoted text---
> I've just checked, some java library packages indeed do depend on 
> -jre-headless, and some do not depend on any jre package at all.
> Anyways, if I recall correctly, Matthew Johnson once told me (when we 
> were discussing a patch for jh_depends) that java libraries aren't 
> supposed to depend on any jre, it is the java apps.

It seems like it could depend on the library package.  If it's strictly a
library, meaning it doesn't have any main() methods lurking about that are
useful to users, then the guideline should be not to depend on a JRE package.  I
suppose there are library packages out there that contain classes you might want
to invoke directly with a JRE, but I imagine they would the exception.  (And in
any event, I think this would be a corner case - i.e. how often would a user or
developer be loading library packages without having a JRE installed?)

So a general rule of not depending on a JRE package seems like a good approach.
 It's one less thing that has to change if the virtual JRE package name changes,
and that's across all of the library packages.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


Reply to: