Shouldn't this one replace 3). As if there are no alternatives, priorities are meaningless.
Alexander Kurtakov Red Hat Eclipse team ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jiri Vanek" <jva...@redhat.com> > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2015 1:42:53 PM > Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java > platform in Fedora > > On 02/27/2015 12:04 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 02/27/2015 10:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > > > >> If we want to be sure that this legacy jdk will not interfere with > >> the system JDK let it not provide anything via alternatives. That > >> way people that want it can use it by playing with PATH/JAVA_HOME > >> (just like they do with other JVMs). > > > > That's right. > > > > In that case, to add another rule - " 8) all alternatives bindings must be > removed" - must be added. > > J. > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
