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

Re: Summary of the LTS BoF held during DebConf

Am 28.01.2016 um 20:05 schrieb Moritz Mühlenhoff:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 08:02:47PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> In my opinion OpenJDK 7 should be an adequate replacement for OpenJDK 6
>> and I can't think of any serious regressions since all Java packages
>> have proven to work with both JDKs. Why not strongly recommend to LTS
>> users to switch to OpenJDK 7 but give them some time to do so and then
>> phase out OpenJDK 6 support at the end of 2016?
> Some packages in wheezy have dependencies on the respective opendjk-6
> packages, but that can probably be tweaked with openjdk-7 providing
> the old package namespace.

In general Java applications have alternative dependencies like
default-jre | java7-runtime | java6-runtime. As soon as OpenJDK 7 is the
default JDK all packages should be fine that alternatively depend on one
of those three or directly on openjdk-7-jre although that is not
recommended in general. OpenJDK 7 provides java7-runtime and java6-runtime.

Packages that only depend on openjdk-6-jre are problematic. Using
apt-cache rdepends openjdk-6-jre on Wheezy yields two packages that
strictly depend on openjdk-6-jre: tunnelx and rcran-r-java. I think we
should try to contact the maintainers in both cases and evaluate if this
is really necessary. Then we could either fix this with a simple
dependency switch or in the worst case declare them unsupported. Please
share, if there is a better way to find those kind of packages.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: