[libreoffice] 02/02: also upstream bumped their JDK requirment to 1.6 now
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
rene pushed a commit to branch debian-experimental-5.3
in repository libreoffice.
commit 5299940a5a7a862ce962f8c8bbe5b84de8cecc46
Author: Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org>
Date: Thu Aug 25 22:50:42 2016 +0200
also upstream bumped their JDK requirment to 1.6 now
---
changelog | 11 ++++++-----
control | 2 +-
rules | 2 +-
tests/control | 2 +-
4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/changelog b/changelog
index f62a693..ab45556 100644
--- a/changelog
+++ b/changelog
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-libreoffice (1:5.3.0~alpha0~git20160819-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
+libreoffice (1:5.3.0~alpha0~git20160825-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
* New upstream snapshot
- fixes typo in VCL.xcu; s/Tino/Tinos/ (closes: #834580)
@@ -8,10 +8,11 @@ libreoffice (1:5.3.0~alpha0~git20160819-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
* debian/rules, debian/control.transitionals.in: remove jessie->stretch
transitionals again
* debian/rules, control.gcj.in: cleanup:
- - remove support for gcj (and thus building -gcj "native") completely,
- openjdk-9 apparently will drops support for source/target 1.5 (which gcj
- only supports), and gcc-7 apparently even will drop gcj, too
- (and the officeotron/odfvalidator stuff fails because due to the java-gcj
+ - remove support for gcj (and thus building -gcj "native") completely;
+ openjdk-9 apparently will drop support for source/target 1.5 (which gcj
+ only supports) and gcc-7 apparently even will drop gcj, too - and upstream
+ bumped their requirement to 1.6 anyways.
+ (also the officeotron/odfvalidator stuff fails because due to the java-gcj
in the path for safety reasons it picks up gcj..)
-- Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org> Thu, 26 May 2016 20:00:57 +0200
diff --git a/control b/control
index 067a621..a26c6b6 100644
--- a/control
+++ b/control
@@ -15,10 +15,10 @@ Build-Depends: ant (>= 1.7.0) [!mips64],
coinor-libcoinmp-dev (>= 1.7.6+dfsg1-2),
coinor-libcoinutils-dev (>= 2.9.15-3.1),
debhelper (>= 9.20160114),
+ default-jdk (>= 1:1.6) [!mips64],
default-jdk (>= 1:1.7-48) [ia64],
default-jdk (>= 2:1.7-52.1) [kfreebsd-any],
default-jdk (>= 2:1.8-55) [sparc64],
- default-jdk [!mips64],
dh-python,
dpkg-dev (>= 1.18.2~),
fastjar,
diff --git a/rules b/rules
index e54751f..6deb52f 100755
--- a/rules
+++ b/rules
@@ -944,7 +944,7 @@ ifeq "$(ENABLE_JAVA)" "y"
ifeq "$(JDK)" "default"
BUILD_DEPS += , java-common (>= 0.49)
JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/default-java
- BUILD_DEPS += , default-jdk $(filter-out !ia64,$(OOO_NO_JAVA_ARCHS))
+ BUILD_DEPS += , default-jdk (>= 1:1.6) $(filter-out !ia64,$(OOO_NO_JAVA_ARCHS))
ifneq (,$(findstring ia64,$(OOO_JAVA_ARCHS)))
BUILD_DEPS += , default-jdk (>= 1:1.7-48) [ia64]
endif
diff --git a/tests/control b/tests/control
index 0f8109b..6392bd1 100644
--- a/tests/control
+++ b/tests/control
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
Tests: junit-subsequentcheck
-Depends: libreoffice, libreoffice-subsequentcheckbase, libreoffice-sdbc-hsqldb, autoconf, automake, bc, bison, bzip2, fastjar, flex (>= 2.3.35), gperf, libcups2-dev, libfontconfig1-dev, libfreetype6-dev (>= 2.2.0), libice-dev, libsm-dev, libx11-dev, libxaw7-dev, libxext-dev, libxinerama-dev, libxkbfile-dev, libxrender-dev, libxt-dev, libxtst-dev, pkg-config, unzip, x11proto-render-dev, xsltproc, zip, zlib1g-dev , libgltf-dev (>= 0.0.2-4) , opencollada-dev (>= 0.1.0~20140703.ddf8f47+dfsg1 [...]
+Depends: libreoffice, libreoffice-subsequentcheckbase, libreoffice-sdbc-hsqldb, autoconf, automake, bc, bison, bzip2, fastjar, flex (>= 2.3.35), gperf, libcups2-dev, libfontconfig1-dev, libfreetype6-dev (>= 2.2.0), libice-dev, libsm-dev, libx11-dev, libxaw7-dev, libxext-dev, libxinerama-dev, libxkbfile-dev, libxrender-dev, libxt-dev, libxtst-dev, pkg-config, unzip, x11proto-render-dev, xsltproc, zip, zlib1g-dev , libgltf-dev (>= 0.0.2-4) , opencollada-dev (>= 0.1.0~20140703.ddf8f47+dfsg1 [...]
Tests: pyuno-import
Depends: python3-uno
--
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on /srv/git.debian.org/git/pkg-openoffice/libreoffice.git
Reply to: