Bug#256283: [pylucene-dev] Re: PyLucence Debian Package
Jeff Breidenbach [breidenbach@gmail.com] said:
> Andi is correct, Java Lucene 1.4.3 compiles ok with a Free Software
> toolchain. Specifically we use kaffe. Getting this to work took a lot
> of time and effort. It is unknown at this time whether the release
> candidate for Java Lucene 1.9 can be built using kaffe.
Oh, yes. I thought it did not and that was why it was in
contrib. I've finally upgraded one of my spare computers to
unstable so I can test for real.
> Yet Another Option (what are we on now, 5? 6?) is for
> Debian to patch it's version of Java Lucene 1.9 to be
> compatible with PyLucene. This only makes sense if the
> patches are benign - i.e. do not significantly interfere
> with other users of Java Lucene. For example, the eclipse
> people would go berserk if we broke their build.
As Andi implied, this option seems kind of sketchy and not
very future proof. That seems to just be the nature of the
beast. Besides, the Eclipse people scare me :)
> Let's try to boil this down into an immediate todo list:
>
> 1) Find out if Java Lucene 1.9 can compile with kaffe [JB? Barry? Anyone?]
If it can be compiled with the software stack that gets
installed from the "free-java-sdk" virtual package, is that
good enough? That does not appear to install kaffee.
I'll play around with trying to get this to work. Andi,
when you normally compile the Lucene code which JDK do you
use and on which platform (sorry if you answered this
elsewhere)? Before I begin I want to verify I can at least
reproduce what Andi is doing before I try to attempt a build
with a totally free software Java stack.
However, don't let my trying stop anyone else from trying or
asking around.
> 2) Look for other issues in the current PyLucene package [JB]
I already noticed that unstable has swig 1.2.27, which Andi
says will not work. So, that's another issue. :(
> In any case, my vote is to pick an approach that gets something in Debian
> sooner rather than later. Programmer attention span is a rare commodity and
> we should strike while it is hot.
Okay, I'll try to build it with a free software java stack.
However, if that proves too difficult is building it with a
non-free JDK and putting the package in contrib an option?
-matthew
Reply to: