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

Re: Bug#764630: RFS: javatools 0.48 [RC]

On 12/15/2014 12:06 AM, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Markus Koschany <apo@gambaru.de> wrote:
> [...]
>> Actually what was the reasoning behind the choice to use a custom shell
>> script like jarwrapper instead of jexec to register executable jars with
>> binfmt-misc? This question also came up in the bug report.
> Here is my guess:
> `jexec` only works with openjdk installed. At one point debian had
> multiple java implementation (sun, kaffe...). These days only two
> really remains, so maybe an easier solution would be to have a
> `gcj-exec` provided by `gcj-jdk` to mimic openjdk package. Which means
> it would be much easier to handle the LD_LIBRARY_PATH issue within the
> `gcj-exec` executable.
> jarwrapper is only really needed with a custom jre installation...

That sounds reasonable to me, although it can be hard in practice to
keep things functional for users running non-Debian JRE packages.  Which
is not to say that we shouldn't generally discourage jarwrapper...


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: