Re: Oracle's Java package status
On 2011-09-04 12:22, Camaleón wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I sent this message to "debian-user" mailing list but as I got no feeback
> from there I try now here, if this is not the proper list, please tell.
>
Hi,
I am thinking d-java@l.d.o might be a better place (CC'ed).
> I think you all are aware of the recent news for Oracle's java binaries
> that will be removed from almost every linux distribution repositories¹
> because of the new Oracle's policy for redistributing this packages
> (sigh...).
>
> So far so good but I can foresee there will be several users (me
> included :-P) that will need to use Oracle's packages instead openJDK,
> so is there any FAQ or How-To guide to make this step smoothly for users
> that will need to install both Java JRE and plugin (32 and 64 bits) in
> Debian upcoming Wheezy and onwards?
>
Perhaps the Java Team might be interested in it. Personally (as a Java
Team member) I think it might be time to "go all in" on using and
improving OpenJDK.
If you can provide some code snippets that demonstrate where Oracle
Java behaves better than OpenJDK, we are very interested in hearing
about them.
Anyhow, as it is you can get away with creating a "fake" package that
claims to be (or provide) sun-java6 and java{,2,5,6}-runtime{,-headless}
and install that package locally (I believe equivs might be useful for
this)[1]. This will work for Squeeze (and probably also Lenny) and Wheezy.
> I can open a "wishlist" bug for that but before flooding BTS I better
> ask how this will be managed or if there will be an "action-path" for
> this.
>
> ¹http://sylvestre.ledru.info/blog/sylvestre/2011/08/26/sun_java6_packages_removed_from_debian_u
>
> Greetings,
>
As I recall, java-common used to have some templates for creating a
deb-package to trick APT into thinking that Java was installed. I
suppose those could be restored - feel free to file a wishlist bug
against java-common for that.
~Niels
[1] Obviously you would still need to install Oracle Java locally, but
the fake deb package would convince APT that you have it.
Reply to: