On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 02:39:15PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > Steve Langasek writes: > > On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 11:42:03AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > > It's a little weird. The package that puts the plugin into firefox dir (via > > > symlink) is java-gcj-compat-plugin, but gcjwebplugin-4.1 contains the actualy > > > object. I suppose when a few versions of gcjwebplugin-X.Y exist, > > > java-gcj-compat-plugin will decide which one is more suitable by changing the > > > dependency and the symlink. > > That sounds like a terrible amount of complexity to me. I can't imagine why > > it would ever be beneficial to carry more than one version of gcjwebplugin > > around in the archive at a time. > gcjwebplugin doesn't have it's own source anymore. it's in classpath > (and gcj-4.1). gcjwebplugin-4.1 is compiled to native code and ensures > that the gij runtime is used with it. None of which sounds to me like a reason to ship multiple copies. The security implications of any one version are bad enough, without having multiple versions to worry about; so I would fervently hope that by the time we're ready to ship gcjwebplugin in stable we would have this narrowed down to a single upstream version that works on all archs we're going to support. (Indeed, it looks like gcj-4.1 is the only supported version of gcj for etch anyway?) -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature