On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 17:00:09 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
> We want to implement virtuals for Java at some point and for that we
> need to know the package that provides the virtual because some virtuals
> can be provided by the JDK or normal packages and this affects the JDK
> selection at build time. One option is to call into Portage to find this
> out, but of course Paludis and Pkgcore people most likely don't like
> this approach. One thing that comes to mind is to allow for virtuals to
> install files so we can install the provider information in a format
> easy for us. We need the information in format ${PN}-${SLOT} because
> that's the way we install in /usr/share. So do you think it's ok for
> virtuals to install files (we can of course call the category
> java-virtual/ too), should we call Portage code, or do you have an
> another idea?
The virtual ebuilds that utilize JAR service provider discovery mechanism
(in META-INF/services, from jdk1.4) should install its' API jars and use
virtual/ category. And those who don't - have to be patched to utilize or
have to use some special upwards compatibility layer (generate
some special metadata file and use special eclass)..?
--
Vytautas Jakutis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
