On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 03:28:31AM -0400, Daniel Richard G. wrote: > On Tue, 2017 Mar 28 08:36+0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > > > > > > > That installation would fail with a non clear message if the Java > > > > support is not there. -> Bad. > > > > > > > > We had that "fun" in the past... > > > > > > So, there are Java-based LibreOffice extension packages that do not > > > properly declare their Java dependencies? > > > > I didn't say "packages"? Extensions from the wild, from upstream, from > > LOs extension website _in oxt format_. > > If LibreOffice is installed without Java runtime support, then how is > the failed installation of Java-based third-party extensions a > problem? That is exactly what should happen.
But people out there don't know what their extension is written in and (often) don't know about java-common or so. Thus the metapackage gets it in because newbies out there just do apt-get install libreoffice. Trust me, we have been there various times and thus why a default LO install *does* install it. This won't be changed. Regards, Rene
