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

Re: Solving the default-jdk-builddep mess

On 12.04.2010 11:27, Torsten Werner wrote:
Hash: SHA1


Niels Thykier schrieb:
I think the best idea is to rename default-jdk-builddep into something
else that does not trigger the "Ah, this is what I should put in
B-D"-instinct of our fellow maintainers and developers. If you have a
suggestion for a new name, please come with it.

i think we should remove default-jdk-builddep. If a package needs
gcj-jdk it should be specified as an extra B-D.

no, that seems to be wrong. assume an architecture which doesn't have gcj-jdk (which we had in the past), you'll have a dependency of gcj-jdk [...] which you'll have to change in every package, whereas the current solution doesn't require any package change but java-common.

The change was discussed here on the ML. I don't mind about the name, but this should be a distinct package.

CC'ing Enrico; please change that in [1] for now.


[1] http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/nm/trunk/nm-templates/nm_ts1_followup.txt?revision=1136&view=markup

Reply to: