Re: Java Policy.

[Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>]

>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Pimlott <ota-28@andrew.pimlott.net> writes:

Andrew> seems to forbid both code with native parts, and Java code
Andrew> compiled to machine binaries with gcj.  It seems reasonable to
Andrew> me to allow both of these.

Does this really need to be part of the java policy?  I thought the
Java policy was really aimed only at things that would install .class
or .jar files.

Naming it the "java" policy is perhaps a bit misleading since it might
include, say, Ada programs compiled to target the JVM.  Perhaps
calling it the "jvm policy" would be more accurate.


Anyway, I'd like to see Java libraries built with gcj and installed as
.so files.  I think that would be useful.  It's also useful to have
common Java programs precompiled.  For instance, with rhug I can build
jasmin and treat it just like any compiled program; it is very
convenient.

So I think I'd like the Java policy to recommend that packagers also
build a precompiled package for use with gcj.  However, such packages
wouldn't have to fall under the Java policy but instead under whatever
policies govern other .so files.

One oddity here is that with gcj the "-dev" package would also want to
include the .jar files somehow (i.e., depend on the ordinary "java"
package).  And, perhaps, CNI headers generated with gcjh.

Tom


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org