On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:59:32 -0400, Mike Miller wrote: > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:00:33 +0200, Alois Schloegl wrote: > > Octave should not have a strong dependency on openjdk. Any of the > > following solutions would do: > > 1) the dependency should be changed to "recommended", and/or > > 2) it should allow for some alternative java engine (e.g. gcj or > > whatever). (see also [4] ), > > 3) keeping the java dependency in a octave package "octave-java" as it > > was before 3.8.x > > Before #1 or #3 are feasible, some upstream work will need to be done to > allow Octave to detect the (presence of / version of / path to) JRE at > runtime. Please see upstream bug #40111.
Minor clarification: currently, when Octave is compiled with Java support but the JRE is not actually present, the error is handled and reported: octave:1> javaMethod ("getRuntime", "java.lang.Runtime") error: javaMethod: /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64/jre/lib/amd64/server/libjvm.so: failed to load: /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-openjdk-amd64/jre/lib/amd64/server/libjvm.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory octave:2> So Octave does handle this to some degree. The error reporting is not ideal and could be improved as part of #40111. But it does look feasible to be able to run Octave without a JRE. Users who opt out of installing default-jre-headless will see errors like the above if they try to use java functions, or functions that rely on java such as those in the octave-io package. Thoughts? -- mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org