On 5/17/22 00:10, Fabio Valentini wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 4:54 PM Andrew Hughes <gnu.and...@redhat.com> wrote:
Let me join the train of -1 votes. I consider this a step entirely in the
wrong direction. The JDK should be linked to system libraries wherever
possible just like our other packages. Language interpreters/JITs are not
exempt from that. In fact, I see very little value in providing JDK packages
at all if they are built that way.
I expect JDK users would disagree with you. JDKs from other vendors
(Amazon, Azul, Oracle, etc.) are built in exactly this way. We (and
likely other GNU/Linux distributions) are the exception here.
I don't think this is a valid argument, because you're looking at
OpenJDK in isolation.
As far as I know, almost all compilers and runtimes we ship in Fedora
are built with a certain amount of downstream patches that make them
"slightly different" than what you might install in binary form from
"$foo-lang.org" (if only to make them usable to build other packages
that use them), so OpenJDK is not an exception here at all.
I would even argue that users are *aware* that the compilers /
runtimes that are provided by Linux distributions are at least
*slightly modified* (if only to cater to linux distribution use
cases), and will already fall back to "official" binaries, when
necessary.
If you really want to lower your maintenance burden for OpenJDK
packages, I'd start by not shipping four (or soon five?) different
versions of them.
For example, do we really still need java-1.8.0-openjdk? Or is it time
to retire the ancient Java packages that only still work on a Java
runtime that's almost a decade old?
Or, can even java-11-openjdk be dropped in the near future, since
java-17-openjdk is the default for Fedora 36 and future Fedora
releases?
And do we actually need the "java-latest-openjdk" version at all? If
anybody needs such an up-to-date Java compiler / runtime for their
development work, they'll surely already download an official binary
distribution.
Well yes. Taht is of course option to support only system jdk and be done with
that.
We will need to continue t build - but never release- -latest- package, so we
are able to bootsrap next system jdk (21 or what)
Note one super huge bad side effect - the new system jdk will be totally
untested, including integration.
Thus saying, I woudl ratehr support 4 static different fully jdks tested, then
1 jdk build 4times, which is fully untested
Thanx!
J.
Fabio
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Jiri Vanek Mgr.
Principal QA Software Engineer
Red Hat Inc.
+420 775 39 01 09
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
