eclipse version in repository
hello, I saw that the version of eclipse in the repository of debian unstable is the 3.2, while the current version available on the official site is the 3.4. Is there any reason for this ? ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
Re: eclipse version in repository
2009/6/4 Raphaël Vandon vand...@esiee.fr: hello, I saw that the version of eclipse in the repository of debian unstable is the 3.2, while the current version available on the official site is the 3.4. Is there any reason for this ? Actually 3.5 should be out (in eclipse.org) real soon now :-) The reason it is not in debian is that eclipse is notoriously hard to package and the interested parties currently have no free time. You are more than welcome to help though, I 'm happy to provide advice etc. Pantelis ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
Re: eclipse version in repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Pantelis Koukousoulas wrote: 2009/6/4 Raphaël Vandon vand...@esiee.fr: hello, I saw that the version of eclipse in the repository of debian unstable is the 3.2, while the current version available on the official site is the 3.4. Is there any reason for this ? Actually 3.5 should be out (in eclipse.org) real soon now :-) The reason it is not in debian is that eclipse is notoriously hard to package and the interested parties currently have no free time. Actually im on the way of repackage it (for my needs) , but im way not a debian developer. What is the policy about eclipse plugins ? should they be in seperate package or in the eclipse currently im working only on the java part (since that is what i need ) . You are more than welcome to help though, I 'm happy to provide advice etc. Pantelis ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers - -- -- Boris Shtrasman |Gnu/Linux Software developer | | IM : bori...@jabber.org | | URL : myrtfm.blogspot.com| ___ Linkidin : http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=key=24962635 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkon6T8ACgkQHiYkXfwAFkv//wCdHxejaO3Ps017oI8ojZMWVWLs v00An2mTg32Js0mnUH3+XjfeaXU/TdiD =bve4 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
Re: eclipse version in repository
Actually im on the way of repackage it (for my needs) , but im way not a debian developer. This is not a problem, I am not a DD either. We have at least one DD though willing to help with sponsoring etc if the technical problems are solved. What is the policy about eclipse plugins ? should they be in seperate package or in the eclipse Unfortunately there is no official policy for that. It is one of the problems. E.g., a possible issue is Equinox (the eclipse OSGi runtime). It would be best if it were distributed separately (since a few people use it standalone) but this makes maintainance harder. For now a policy that splits eclipse to packages the same way it is done for eclipse 3.2 is probably fine. Important plugins (like cdt/jdt) should be installed in a place like /usr/share/eclipse/dropins, each plugin in its own dir. This avoids interoperability problems with eclipse P2 at least until a better integration between apt/dpkg and P2 is developed. currently im working only on the java part (since that is what i need ) . Well, the core and jdt are by far the hardest, so if you can solve this it will be a big win already. You could look at Fedora's eclipse-build and my eclipse-debian package for some ideas. You could also look at the eclipse-ubuntu project. That one was the most active last time I looked (I think). HTH, Pantelis ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
Bug#531873: tomcat6: please package new upstream version
Package: tomcat6 Version: 6.0.18-3 Severity: wishlist Tomcat 6.0.20 is out with a lot of bugfixes. Please update the package. -- System Information: Debian Release: squeeze/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 2.6.29.4-melech (SMP w/2 CPU cores; PREEMPT) Locale: LANG=sv_SE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=sv_SE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages tomcat6 depends on: ii adduser 3.110 add and remove users and groups pn jsvc none (no description available) ii tomcat6-common6.0.18-dfsg1-1 Servlet and JSP engine -- common f tomcat6 recommends no packages. Versions of packages tomcat6 suggests: pn tomcat6-admin none (no description available) pn tomcat6-docs none (no description available) pn tomcat6-examples none (no description available) ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
liblaf-widget-java 4.2-2 MIGRATED to testing
FYI: The status of the liblaf-widget-java source package in Debian's testing distribution has changed. Previous version: 4.0-2 Current version: 4.2-2 -- This email is automatically generated once a day. As the installation of new packages into testing happens multiple times a day you will receive later changes on the next day. See http://release.debian.org/testing-watch/ for more information. ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
Bug#531917: antlr: FTBFS: Missing Build-Depends
Package: antlr Version: 2.7.7-11 Severity: serious X-Debbugs-CC: debian-...@lists.debian.org From my pbuilder build log: ... ln -s libantlr-java debian/libantlr-java-gcj/usr/share/doc/libantlr-java-gcj dh_nativejava -plibantlr-java-gcj make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/buildd/antlr-2.7.7/debian/libantlr-java-gcj/usr/lib/gcj' /usr/bin/gcj -c -fsource-filename=/tmp/filedNq7JM -g -O2 -fPIC -findirect-dispatch -fjni antlr.jar.1.jar -o antlr.jar.1.o make[1]: /usr/bin/gcj: Command not found make[1]: *** [antlr.jar.1.o] Error 127 make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/buildd/antlr-2.7.7/debian/libantlr-java-gcj/usr/lib/gcj' aot-compile: error: /usr/bin/make exited with code 2 dh_nativejava: aot-compile returned exit code 1 make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 dpkg-buildpackage: error: fakeroot debian/rules binary gave error exit status 2 Other than adding gcj to the Build-Depends (which would tangle up the huge mess of circular Build-Depends in Debian's Java packages even more), I would have thought changing that line to: dh_nativejava -plibantlr-java-gcj -- --gcj=/usr/bin/gcj-4.3 \ --dbtool=/usr/bin/gcj-dbtool-4.3 should also work, but it doesn't seem to pass along those arguments to aot-compile. So I'm CCing the bug to the gcc-defaults (libgcj-common) maintainers' list, to see if this is the intended behavior, and if this bug is perhaps a more general problem that should be fixed in libgcj-common. Maybe aot-compiler should be using the current default gcj-* instead of the gcj symlink as its default. -- Daniel Schepler ___ pkg-java-maintainers mailing list pkg-java-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-java-maintainers
