Re: Bug#578421: virtual-packages: Retire java-compiler, java2-compiler and java-virtual-machine
On 2011-11-29 00:32, Bill Allombert wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:07:53AM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>> Rene Engelhard wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 08:33:12PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
>>>> [java{,2}-compiler]
>>>> - default-jdk. If used in an alternative in Build-Depends{,-Indep} then pick
>>>> one of the options (The Java Team recommends default-jdk).
>>>
>>> And what are you going to do as replacement for "whatever Java compiler, I don't care
>>> as long as it understands Java 2"?
>>>
>>> Grüße/Regards,
>>>
>>> René
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Good point.
>>
>> A java compiler is usually useless without the a backing Java core
>> library, so you probably want to replace it with a JDK.
>>
>> Also please note that we have removed a lot of JVMs from Squeeze;
>> currently Debian has 3 or so left.
>> * openjdk-6
>> * gcj/gij
>> * sun-java6 (non-free)
>> * default (which is either openjdk-6 or gcj/gij)
>>
>> As I recall there is also a JVM implemented in .NET or so, but it does
>> not identify itself via one of the javaX-runtime (nor the java-compiler
>> ones) and I cannot remember its name offhand.
>>
>> Aside from the mono JVM (which I do not really know), all of them can
>> run Java5 code[1], so basically it is useless to have both java-compiler
>> and java2-compiler.
>> On a related note: it appears that only sun-java6 provides
>> java2-compiler (even though all others could provide it as well).
>>
>> If I was to replace a java{,2}-compiler to mean "Any java compiler" I
>> would use:
>> default-jdk | gcj-jdk | sun-java6-jdk [3]
>>
>> But I would definitely consider only using default-jdk (especially for
>> Suggests). While that may seem a bit strange as replacement for "Any
>> compiler" consider the following:
>> default-jdk is either openjdk-6-jdk or gcj-jdk
>> openjdk-6 is based on the same source as sun-java6
>> openjdk-6 is available any architecture where sun-java6 is.
>> gcj-jdk is inferior to openjdk-6 (not only due to [1])
>>
>> While sun-java6 is still superior to openjdk-6 in some cases, I believe
>> this is only a runtime thing and not a compile issue. So by using
>> default-jdk you get the best compiler we got and it is shorter.
>> Of course there are users using sun-java6-jdk which will not like if
>> apt pulls in a second JDK, so for Recommends+Depends it may be worth to
>> use the alternatives.
>>
>> With a little grep-dctrl magic I noticed we 1 absolute dependency on
>> javaX-compiler (laby), four Recommends (robocode, jde, jython, mmake)
>> and 5 Suggests (ant, ant1.7, cup, openoffice.org-dev-doc, lab).
>> There are also 6 Build-Depends(-Indep) cases, but I already covered
>> those. All in all we got a total of 15 (9 + 6) uses of java-compiler and
>> java2-compiler, so they do not appear to be widely used.
>>
>> ~Niels
>>
>> [1] gcj/gij does not implement the full Java5 API.
>>
>> [2] Should be updated, since gcj is a transitional package.
>>
>> [3] You could add openjdk-6-jdk to this list, but on architectures where
>> openjdk-6 is available, it will be pulled by default-jdk.
>
> Hello Renee,
> Are you fine with that change ?
>
> Niels, can you get other Java people to second this ?
>
> Cheers,
Hi,
Considering the retirement of these virtual packages was up for public
debate on d-java in 2010[1], it shouldn't be a problem to get someone to
(re-)second this. :)
So, hallo d-java people - if you (still) agree with this change, please
reply to #578421. :)
~Niels
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2010/04/msg00088.html
Reply to: