I have decided to extract the GCJ part into its own patch. I have
created an interdiff between the last and the current version of the
fosdem06 patch. I would have made an interdiff for the GCJ part as well,
but it failed.
Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 23.03.2010 11:54, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>> Le mardi 23 mars 2010 =C3=A0 10:26 +0100, Niels Thykier a =C3=A9crit =
:
>>>>[...]
>>
>> Sure, what do you think of this:
>>
>> In the past gcj packages were added in order to improve
>> performance of Java libraries and programs. However, this
>> performance comes at the cost of size, extra compilation
>> time and creates architecture dependent packages.
>=20
> not only in the past.
>=20
Added with the change above and the mention of its usefulness in the
absence of a JVM with a JIT compiler.
>> A request for permission to add gcj should packages should
>> convince the Java Team that the performance boost of adding
>> the gcj package or packages out-weights the disadvantages.
Clause added without change.
>=20
> this is always true for archs not having vm with a JIT.
>=20
If that is the case, why are we not doing more than a handful of
gcj-packages? Surely if the performance boost always out-weights the
extra costs, then the policy ought to have a "should" or "must" on
building these instead of a "only with permission".
>> The request and the permission may be limited to certain
>> architectures.
Clause excluded.
>=20
> that should be removed. there is a list of these archs in
> /usr/share/gcj/debian_defaults which should be sourced in debian/rules.=
> it's fine to build these packages on every arch. the empty package
> doesn't hurt, and you won't have to make changes to the packaging if a
> new architecture is added.
>=20
I have not mentioned this in the policy yet. What do the team feel about
this? Building empty gcj packages on architectures with a JIT compiler?
> the packages do make sense for architectures which only come with the
> ZeroVM in OpenJDK, and no JIT.
>=20
Thanks, did not know that. Which architectures are we talking about
here? All, all but i386 and amd64, or ...?
I had a look in "/usr/share/gcj/debian_defaults" and it contains all
architectures in "gcj_native_archs" (except m68k), but I was not sure if
it reflected the architectures without a JIT compiler.
> Matthias
>=20
>=20
~Niels
--------------000204050406030207090607
Content-Type: text/plain;
name="p2_fosdem_r2-r3.interdiff"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="p2_fosdem_r2-r3.interdiff"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--------------000204050406030207090607
Content-Type: text/x-diff;
name="p3_fosdem06-gcj.patch"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="p3_fosdem06-gcj.patch"
Description: Applies the GCJ part of the FOSDOM 2006 draft. The original
proposals have been adapted to better fit the current time.
.
URL: http://wiki.debian.org/Java/Draft
--- policy.xml.orig 2010-03-24 08:49:38.103512020 +0100
+++ policy.xml 2010-03-24 09:15:47.944514335 +0100
@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@
<!ENTITY d-jdk "<emphasis>default-jdk</emphasis>">
<!ENTITY d-jbdep "<emphasis>default-jdk-builddep</emphasis>">
<!ENTITY d-jdoc "<emphasis>default-jdk-doc</emphasis>">
+<!ENTITY JVM "<acronym>JVM</acronym>">
+<!ENTITY JIT "<acronym>JIT</acronym>">
]>
=20
<book>
@@ -128,6 +130,11 @@
</para>
=20
<para>
+ The Java bytecode &may; additionally be shipped as machine code, a=
s produced for example
+ by the GNU Compiler for Java, in a separate architecture-specific =
package.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
Programs and libraries &should; enable JUnit tests, if these are p=
resent.
However, these tests &mustnot; lead to build failures.
</para>
@@ -311,6 +318,64 @@
</para>
</sect1>
=20
+ <sect1 id=3D"policy-gcj-native">
+ <title>Native Java Bytecode (gcj packages)</title>
+
+ <para>
+ Java bytecode compiled into native code is referred to as
+ gcj-code and packages containing gcj-code as gcj-packages.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ gcj-packages has been added in order to improve
+ performance of Java libraries and programs. This is
+ particularly useful on architectures where the JVM
+ does not have a &JIT;. However, this performance comes=20
+ at the cost of size, extra compilation time and
+ creates architecture dependent packages.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ Packages &mustnot; ship gcj-code without the permission of
+ the Java team (<email>debian-java@lists.debian.org</email>).
+ Source packages that shipped gcj-packages as of March 22nd,
+ 2010, have been given this permission through the
+ ratification of this policy.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ A request for permission to add gcj should packages should
+ convince the Java Team that the performance boost of adding
+ the gcj-packages out-weights the disadvantages.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ Source packages compiling gcj-packages &must; Build-Depend on
+ &d-jbdep;. The gcj-code &should; only be shipped for a selected
+ set of architectures.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ The gcj-code &must; be installed in <filename>/usr/lib/gcj/</filename>=
+ and shipped in a separately from the original jar file. The gcj-package=
+ &must; also install the classmap file generated by aot-compile in
+ <filename>/usr/share/gcj/classmap.d/</filename>.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ The gcj-package &must; call rebuild-gcj-db in the postinst and
+ postrm script, if rebuild-gcj-db is present.
+ </para>
+
+ <para>
+ The gcj-package &must; depend on the package providing the jar
+ file, it is a native compilation.
+ The package containing the jar file &must; declare either a
+ Suggests or a Recommends relationship on the gcj-package.
+ </para>
+
+ </sect1>
+
<sect1 id=3D"policy-politics">
<title>Main, contrib or non-free</title>
<para>
--------------000204050406030207090607
Content-Type: text/x-diff;
name="p2_fosdem06_r3.patch"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="p2_fosdem06_r3.patch"
Description: Applies the FOSDOM 2006 draft. The original proposals have b=
een
adapted to better fit the current time. The GCJ changes have been moved =
to
a separate patch.
.
This excludes the "Java virtual machines" part based on feedback on #365=
408
URL: http://wiki.debian.org/Java/Draft
Closes: #227587
--- policy.xml.orig 2010-03-22 20:04:35.248312944 +0100
+++ policy.xml 2010-03-24 08:44:42.695513119 +0100
@@ -11,6 +11,9 @@
<!ENTITY j2r "<emphasis>java2-runtime</emphasis>">
<!ENTITY jc "<emphasis>java-compiler</emphasis>">
<!ENTITY j2c "<emphasis>java2-compiler</emphasis>">
+<!ENTITY d-jdk "<emphasis>default-jdk</emphasis>">
+<!ENTITY d-jbdep "<emphasis>default-jdk-builddep</emphasis>">
+<!ENTITY d-jdoc "<emphasis>default-jdk-doc</emphasis>">
]>
=20
<book>
@@ -119,15 +122,14 @@
<para>
Both &must; be shipped as Java bytecode (<filename>*.class</filena=
me>
files, packaged in a <filename>*.jar</filename> archive) and with
- an "Architecture: all".
- It &may; additionally be shipped as machine code, as produced for =
example
- by the GNU Compiler for Java, in a separate architecture-specific
- package.
+ an "Architecture: all". There are rare exceptions to this such as =
Eclipse
+ SWT. Exceptions to this rule can only be granted by the Java Team.=
+ Requests &must; be sent to <email>debian-java@lists.debian.org</em=
ail>.
</para>
=20
<para>
- This policy does not yet address the issue of documentation (for i=
nstance
- HTML pages made with javadoc).
+ Programs and libraries &should; enable JUnit tests, if these are p=
resent.
+ However, these tests &mustnot; lead to build failures.
</para>
=20
<sect1 id=3D"policy-vm">
@@ -257,9 +259,7 @@
</para>
=20
<para>
- Java libraries &must; depend on the needed runtime environment
- (&j1r; and/or &j2r;) but &should; not depend (only suggest)
- java-virtual-machine.
+ Class files in a java library &must; be built with debug symbols.
</para>
=20
<para>
@@ -295,6 +295,20 @@
architecture-specific and follow the usual libXXX[version]-java
naming convention.
</para>
+
+ <para>
+ Java library packages &should; compile the javadoc API of the
+ library. The API &must; link against the javadoc API of the
+ libraries it depends on. This includes the core java classes,
+ which are provided by &d-jdoc;. The API &must; be registered with
+ doc-base and &must; be installed in
+ <filename>/usr/share/doc/<package>/api/</filename> or
+ <filename>/usr/share/doc/<package>/api-<component>/</filena=
me>.
+ </para>
+ <para>
+ The API &must; be place in a separate doc package. This package
+ &must; depend on the doc packages it was linked against.
+ </para>
</sect1>
=20
<sect1 id=3D"policy-politics">
@@ -322,6 +336,8 @@
url=3D"http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath";>GNU-Classpath</ulink>=
has
a list of free versions), it cannot go to main. If
your package itself is free, it &must; go to contrib.
+ Since java libraries do not have a runtime dependency,
+ this rule does not apply to them.
</para>
</listitem>
=20
@@ -444,6 +460,11 @@
will be integrated in the policy, one day).
</para>
</listitem>
+ <listitem>
+ <para>
+ Java packages &should; be built with &d-jdk; if possible.
+ </para>
+ </listitem>
</itemizedlist>
=20
</chapter>
--------------000204050406030207090607--
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature