Re: Clear definition of default-java and its scope
Hi Niels,
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> wrote:
> I propose we solve this by explicitly defining default-java to hold the
> two definitions I mentioned above (it is the only sane choice for
> backwards compatibility as far as I can tell) and post-Squeeze introduce
> a "system-default-java", which is an alternative-controlled Java. For
> Squeeze I would settle with updating the Java FAQ[1].
> This solution will not directly solve LP: #687263[2], but it will
> solve LP: #564699 and also a part of LP: #45348 by allowing users to set
> JAVA_HOME to the system-default-java and now update-alternatives will
> automatically update their JAVA_HOME as well.
that is a good idea.
Cheers,
Torsten
Reply to: