Bug#397045: ant - java-gcj-compat-dev as dependency
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 01:35:12AM +, Paul Cager wrote: Currently: Depends: java-gcj-compat | java-virtual-machine, java-gcj-compat | java1-runtime | java2-runtime, libxerces2-java Recommends: ant-optional, jikes | java-compiler Should ant Depend or Suggest the compiler packages? I'd say Depend, but I suppose its not an absolute dependency - you could have a buildfile that doesn't call javac. Recommends is the right thing. Its no hard dependency but its the used/needed in most cases. Recommends are installe by default by aptitude and synaptic but you can choose to deinstall or not install at all the compiler. IMO that bug should just be closed as people need to be aware what they break when they dont install the Recommends. From the Debian Policy 7.2: Recommends This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency. The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together with this one in all but unusual installations. Cheers, Michael -- .''`. | Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : | Free Java Developer http://www.classpath.org `. `' | `-| 1024D/BAC5 4B28 D436 95E6 F2E0 BD11 5923 A008 2763 483B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#397045: ant - java-gcj-compat-dev as dependency
Michael Koch wrote: On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 01:35:12AM +, Paul Cager wrote: Currently: Depends: java-gcj-compat | java-virtual-machine, java-gcj-compat | java1-runtime | java2-runtime, libxerces2-java Recommends: ant-optional, jikes | java-compiler Should ant Depend or Suggest the compiler packages? I'd say Depend, but I suppose its not an absolute dependency - you could have a buildfile that doesn't call javac. Recommends is the right thing. Its no hard dependency but its the used/needed in most cases. Recommends are installe by default by aptitude and synaptic but you can choose to deinstall or not install at all the compiler. IMO that bug should just be closed as people need to be aware what they break when they dont install the Recommends. From the Debian Policy 7.2: Recommends This declares a strong, but not absolute, dependency. The Recommends field should list packages that would be found together with this one in all but unusual installations. Cheers, Michael I must learn not to write these things late at night - where I'd written Suggest, I meant Recommend. apt-get won't, of course, install the recommended packages, but I don't think I can put up any strong defence for Depends, which is defined in the policy as: required ... to provide a significant amount of functionality I admit defeat and agree it should be Recommends. The warning message unable to locate tools.jar is a bit cryptic, but it should be followed later by an error Unable to find a javac compiler. Is there anything else we could do to make it more obvious to the user that he/she needs to install a compiler? Amend the package's description maybe? Expand the Debian Java FAQ? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#397045: ant - java-gcj-compat-dev as dependency
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 09:45:52AM +, Paul Cager wrote: apt-get won't, of course, install the recommended packages, but I don't think I can put up any strong defence for Depends, which is defined in the policy as: required ... to provide a significant amount of functionality I admit defeat and agree it should be Recommends. apt-get was never meant as a usertool. It was meant to be used as backend for tools time aptitiude and synaptio. I *think* even dselect can use it. I#m not sure about this as I never used dselect. IMO the preferred tool for users is aptitude, synaptic and friends. The warning message unable to locate tools.jar is a bit cryptic, but it should be followed later by an error Unable to find a javac compiler. Is there anything else we could do to make it more obvious to the user that he/she needs to install a compiler? Amend the package's description maybe? Expand the Debian Java FAQ? Mention this in the README.Debian of ant. Every user is expected to read it first when he has problems with a given package. I think this is enough and the best way to support installations without compiler which are unusual but possible. Cheers, Michael -- .''`. | Michael Koch [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : | Free Java Developer http://www.classpath.org `. `' | `-| 1024D/BAC5 4B28 D436 95E6 F2E0 BD11 5923 A008 2763 483B -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#397045: ant - java-gcj-compat-dev as dependency
Currently: Depends: java-gcj-compat | java-virtual-machine, java-gcj-compat | java1-runtime | java2-runtime, libxerces2-java Recommends: ant-optional, jikes | java-compiler Should ant Depend or Suggest the compiler packages? I'd say Depend, but I suppose its not an absolute dependency - you could have a buildfile that doesn't call javac. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
