Re: Icedtea plugin
On 02/08/16 19:48, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 01/08/16 23:26, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> On 01.08.2016 23:01, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>> On 31/07/16 19:41, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 07:34:28PM +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently, icedtea-plugin depends on icedtea-6-plugin, i.e. Java6. Given
>>>>> openjdk-6 is unsupported, we should change it to depend on icedtea-7-plugin
>>>>> instead. See the attached source debdiff (the control file is autogenerated).
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> If no-one objects, I will upload that soon.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It looks good to me.
>>>
>>> Markus said on IRC that another option was to mark icedtea-plugin and
>>> icedtea-6-plugin as unsupported. However, I think we should only do that for
>>> icedtea-6-plugin, and update the metapackage to depend on Java7.
>>
>> Yes, it wouldn't hurt to update the dependency package icedtea-plugin.
>> As far as I know it has no important reverse-dependencies though, for
>> instance OpenJDk 6 only suggests it. So we could also just mark it as
>> unsupported but I leave the decision up to you.
>
> I think icedtea-plugin should be kept updated and point to the supported
> version, so that people can keep it installed and automatically get the next
> supported version when/if it is changed again, whether in Wheezy or in future
> releases.
>
> Since the change is simple, I'll look at uploading it soon.
Uploaded.
I'm not sure whether this deserves a DLA. Probably not, as openjdk-6 is already
marked as unsupported, and there already was [1]. Though I could send something
similar to that, without a DLA number, if that was deemed convenient. Thoughts,
anyone?
Cheers,
Emilio
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2016/05/msg00007.html
Reply to: