[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#654689: ITP: osutil -- Operating system utilities JNI package

05.01.2012 13:25, Steve Cotton kirjoitti:
> Hi Timo,
>> * Package name    : osutil
>>   Description     : Operating system utilities JNI package
>> The Operating System Utilities Java Native Interface (JNI) package
>> supplies various native operating system operations to Java programs.
> Please say in the package description what the functionality
> provided by the package is.

Ok, I stole the above from Fedora. The package is used by the Dogtag
Certificate Server, I need to dig further to see what it's actually used

> Signal.java has one architecture's signal numbers hardcoded in.
> The Java files have hardcoded library paths in, and will break
> with multiarch.
> It's full of error messages printed to stdout / stderr.
> Some of the functionality (such as String to byte conversion)
> seems to duplicate functionality already in Java; maybe they
> weren't in Java back in 1997.
> Generally, the code looks rather buggy.

Yeah, so it seems.. I don't currently build it as multiarch, so haven't
hit the hardcoded paths -issue yet. I'll file these upstream..

>> * License         : GPL-2+
> If the copyright statements are correct, this is GPL-2, not
> GPL-2+.

Oops, fixed that in git.

> But while the copyright statements say "(C) 2007 Red Hat, Inc.", the package
> name and JNI function names have "com.netscape" in them.
> Except the one in src/com/netscape/osutil/unixdefs.h :
> /* ====================================================== 
> * Copyright (c) 1997 Netscape Communications Corporation 
> * This file contains proprietary information of Netscape Communications. 
> * Copying or reproduction without prior written approval is prohibited. 
> * ====================================================== */ 
> If it's pre-Mozilla-Foundation code, there might be a better implementation
> from Mozilla.  Either way, it seems to have licensing issues.

Indeed, I'll ask upstream about this one too. Looks like it's just a

thanks for the review! :)


Reply to: