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

Bug#783815: marked as done (lintian: Using oracle java 8 in a package generate unknow-java-class-version.)

Your message dated Sun, 12 Jul 2015 20:43:00 +0200
with message-id <55A2B534.3020901@thykier.net>
and subject line Re: lintian: Using oracle java 8 in a package generate unknow-java-class-version.
has caused the Debian Bug report #783815,
regarding lintian: Using oracle java 8 in a package generate unknow-java-class-version.
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
783815: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=783815
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lintian
Version: 2.5.10.4
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,
*** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***

   * What led up to the situation?
	We have a package using java 8
   * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
     ineffective)?
	The warning are anoying. 
   * What was the outcome of this action?
	The warning are anoying
   * What outcome did you expect instead?
	No warning.
*** End of the template - remove these lines ***


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.8
  APT prefers oldstable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'oldstable-updates'), (500, 'oldstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_CA.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_CA.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages lintian depends on:
ii  binutils                       2.22-8+deb7u2
ii  bzip2                          1.0.6-4
ii  diffstat                       1.55-3
ii  file                           5.11-2+deb7u8
ii  gettext                        0.18.1.1-9
ii  hardening-includes             2.2
ii  intltool-debian                0.35.0+20060710.1
ii  libapt-pkg-perl                0.1.26+b1
ii  libarchive-zip-perl            1.30-6
ii  libc-bin                       2.13-38+deb7u8
ii  libclass-accessor-perl         0.34-1
ii  libclone-perl                  0.31-1+b2
ii  libdpkg-perl                   1.16.16
ii  libemail-valid-perl            0.190-1
ii  libipc-run-perl                0.92-1
ii  libparse-debianchangelog-perl  1.2.0-1
ii  libtimedate-perl               1.2000-1
ii  liburi-perl                    1.60-1
ii  locales                        2.13-38+deb7u8
ii  man-db                         2.6.2-1
ii  patchutils                     0.3.2-1.1
ii  perl [libdigest-sha-perl]      5.14.2-21+deb7u2

lintian recommends no packages.

Versions of packages lintian suggests:
pn  binutils-multiarch     <none>
pn  dpkg-dev               <none>
ii  libhtml-parser-perl    3.69-2
pn  libperlio-gzip-perl    <none>
pn  libtext-template-perl  <none>
ii  man-db                 2.6.2-1
ii  xz-utils [lzma]        5.1.1alpha+20120614-2

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Source: lintian
Source-Version: 2.5.32

On Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:46:36 -0400 Jonathan Plamondon
<jonathanplamondon@hotmail.fr> wrote:
> Package: lintian
> Version: 2.5.10.4
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear Maintainer,
> *** Please consider answering these questions, where appropriate ***
> 
>    * What led up to the situation?
> 	We have a package using java 8
>    * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or
>      ineffective)?
> 	The warning are anoying. 
>    * What was the outcome of this action?
> 	The warning are anoying
>    * What outcome did you expect instead?
> 	No warning.
> *** End of the template - remove these lines ***
> 
> 
> [...]

Hi,

Lintian 2.5.32 will recognise the Java8 class files as valid, but will
complain that they are too new to be used by the default implementation
in Debian (which is still Java7 at the time of writing).

Thanks,
~Niels

--- End Message ---
Reply to: