Re: RFS: eclipse-mylyn 3.10.0-1
On 11/14/2013 09:11 AM, Jakub Adam wrote: > Dear java packagers, > > I am looking for a sponsor for new upstream release of package > "eclipse-mylyn". > > * Package name: eclipse-mylyn >Version : 3.10.0-1 >Upstream Author : Eclipse Mylyn Project > * URL : http://www.eclipse.org/mylyn > * License : EPL-1.0 >Section : devel > > It builds those binary packages: > > eclipse-mylyn - Task-Focused Interface for Eclipse > eclipse-mylyn-context-cdt - Mylyn context integration for Eclipse CDT > eclipse-mylyn-context-jdt - Task support for Eclipse JDT > eclipse-mylyn-context-pde - Task support for Eclipse PDE > eclipse-mylyn-versions-cvs - Mylyn version control integration for CVS > eclipse-mylyn-tasks-bugzilla - Mylyn Bugzilla Connector > eclipse-mylyn-tasks-trac - Mylyn Trac Connector > eclipse-mylyn-wikitext - Mylyn WikiText > > Package sources can be accessed at: > > https://bitbucket.org/xhaakon/eclipse-mylyn.git > > This is a temporary location, once Alioth is back online, I'll push the > changes > also to the "official" repo at > > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/eclipse-mylyn.git > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package into sid for me. Hi Jakub, Uploaded to sid. The only change I made was to set the distribution in the debian changelog. One clean way to get the changes into alioth will be to use git-import-dsc and then push those, as it will include the tag, etc. Cheers, tony signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: openjdk-7 for kfreebsd
On 14/11/2013 12:53, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > -#ifdef __linux__ > +#if defined(__linux__) || defined(__GLIBC__) > > We have dozens of these for example - that kind of ifdef is ambiguous as > to whether it expects "the Linux kernel" or just "a Linux-like userland" > which is true also of GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/Hurd and potentially other glibc > ports. If you want to check for a Glibc feature (regardless of which kernel we're using), the following is enough: #ifdef __GLIBC__ However note that what usually happens is that other libraries which are used on Linux and are similar to Glibc implement the same features and will want to match this #ifdef too. Thus removing the "__linux__" although it might be strictly correct may cause a regression. I usually just avoid causing the regression by leaving the __linux__ in, even if the feature we're checking has nothing to do with kernel. -- Robert Millan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52850eb9.5070...@debian.org
RFS: eclipse-mylyn 3.10.0-1
Dear java packagers, I am looking for a sponsor for new upstream release of package "eclipse-mylyn". * Package name: eclipse-mylyn Version : 3.10.0-1 Upstream Author : Eclipse Mylyn Project * URL : http://www.eclipse.org/mylyn * License : EPL-1.0 Section : devel It builds those binary packages: eclipse-mylyn - Task-Focused Interface for Eclipse eclipse-mylyn-context-cdt - Mylyn context integration for Eclipse CDT eclipse-mylyn-context-jdt - Task support for Eclipse JDT eclipse-mylyn-context-pde - Task support for Eclipse PDE eclipse-mylyn-versions-cvs - Mylyn version control integration for CVS eclipse-mylyn-tasks-bugzilla - Mylyn Bugzilla Connector eclipse-mylyn-tasks-trac - Mylyn Trac Connector eclipse-mylyn-wikitext - Mylyn WikiText Package sources can be accessed at: https://bitbucket.org/xhaakon/eclipse-mylyn.git This is a temporary location, once Alioth is back online, I'll push the changes also to the "official" repo at http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-java/eclipse-mylyn.git I would be glad if someone uploaded this package into sid for me. Regards, Jakub -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52850430.8000...@ktknet.cz
Re: Renaming artifactId to avoid file conflicts
Le 14/11/2013 17:16, Eugenio Cano-Manuel Mendoza a écrit : > The jline and jline2 packages seem to be in conflict because both > packages create the same artifact(jline.jar) and store their pom file in > the same location under the same name in the maven repo. Hi Eugenio, The common solution in this case is to: - Rename the versionless jar in /usr/share/java (jline2.jar) - Add a Maven rule to transform the version to '2.x' instead of 'debian' Emmanuel Bourg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5284f8b4.4070...@apache.org
Renaming artifactId to avoid file conflicts
Hello, The jline and jline2 packages seem to be in conflict because both packages create the same artifact(jline.jar) and store their pom file in the same location under the same name in the maven repo. Would it be feasible to rename the artifactId of jline2 from 'jline' to 'jline2'? Will it be a problem for maintainers who want to package libraries that depend on jline2 in the future? Regards, Eugenio -- Eugenio Cano-Manuel Mendoza 4096R/ 344C F5B4 0EBF 01C5 5739 CACC CD1C 4E73 AD6D 6F33 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: openjdk-7 for kfreebsd
On 11/14/2013 11:53 AM, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On 14/11/13 09:26, Andrew Haley wrote:
>>> [...] on kfreebsd we are also looking to switch to openjdk-7 as
>>> soon as possible. And we were advised to send our patches
>>> upstream also. I'd appreciate any advice on how to go about doing
>>> that.
>>
>> Talk to me.
>
> Thank you!
>
> Debian applies four patches to openjdk-7 for kfreebsd support, including
> some bits I don't expect to be appropriate for upstream, but I propose
> to split some bits out:
>
> -#ifdef __linux__
> +#if defined(__linux__) || defined(__GLIBC__)
>
> We have dozens of these for example - that kind of ifdef is ambiguous as
> to whether it expects "the Linux kernel" or just "a Linux-like userland"
> which is true also of GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/Hurd and potentially other glibc
> ports.
>
> We also have a handful of these in the patches mentioned below - though
> I propose to match on startsWith("GNU"), in anticipation that GNU/Hurd
> (osname="GNU"?) may someday want to use the same code:
>
> if (osname.startsWith("SunOS") ||
> + osname.startsWith("GNU/kFreeBSD") ||
> osname.startsWith("Linux")) {
>
>
> These two patches are fairly straightforward, enabling build system support:
>
> http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-corba.diff
> http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-jamvm.diff
>
> The final two patches consist of largely the ifdef changes mentioned
> above. Some other parts look clearly objectionable. e.g. I expect you
> don't want to add large blocks of (largely duplicated) kfreebsd-specific
> code to src/os/linux/*:
>
> http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-hotspot.diff
> http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-jdk.diff
Hmm. Some of these are simple enough, but others require more careful
handling.
To begin with: anything not utterly trivial in OpenJDK requires
copyright assignment. I can push simple patches, but this doesn't
look so simple. If someone is prepared to sign Oracle's contributor
agreement and submit these patches, it can be done.
Andrew.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5284c71f.3040...@redhat.com
default-java and openjdk-7 on sparc
On 2013-11-09 14:35, Niels Thykier wrote: > Hi, > > (With my Java hat on and my Release hat off) > > We are getting close to being able to remove openjdk-6 from sid and > testing. However, there is major blocker, which is java-common itself > (and its default-* binaries). mips and mipsel are the only two > architectures still using OpenJDK 6 as default java. > > At the current time, OpenJDK 7 have not been successfully ported on > these architectures and it is my understanding that it is unlikely to > change in the near future. This leaves gcj-jdk as the only viable > option for mips and mipsel. > > I intend to implement these changes in java-common in about 14 days, > unless there are alternative solutions (that does not involve keeping > openjdk-6 around). > > ~Niels > > Hi sparc porters, We are currently debating whether the default java should change from openjdk-6 to gcj for mips and mipsel. I now noticed that while sparc uses openjdk-7 as default java, openjdk-7 no longer builds successfully on sparc and haven't done so for at least 85 days. It is my understanding that Matthias Klose (doko) is the only active maintainer working on OpenJDK-7 and he does not have time to solve this problem. While this is not an immediate problem for getting rid of openjdk-6, it will be a problem that needs to be solved before the Jessie freeze[0]. If you are interested in fixing the OpenJDK-7 build failure, you may (or may not) find [1] interesting. ~Niels [0] Currently available solutions are: use gcj as default java or make OpenJDK-7 build again. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2013/11/msg00072.html (the "odd patch" being a reference to patch attached to #729448) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5284ba47.3080...@thykier.net
Re: openjdk-7 for kfreebsd
Hi Andrew,
On 14/11/13 09:26, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> [...] on kfreebsd we are also looking to switch to openjdk-7 as soon as
>> possible. And we were advised to send our patches upstream also. I'd
>> appreciate any advice on how to go about doing that.
>
> Talk to me.
Thank you!
Debian applies four patches to openjdk-7 for kfreebsd support, including
some bits I don't expect to be appropriate for upstream, but I propose
to split some bits out:
-#ifdef __linux__
+#if defined(__linux__) || defined(__GLIBC__)
We have dozens of these for example - that kind of ifdef is ambiguous as
to whether it expects "the Linux kernel" or just "a Linux-like userland"
which is true also of GNU/kFreeBSD, GNU/Hurd and potentially other glibc
ports.
We also have a handful of these in the patches mentioned below - though
I propose to match on startsWith("GNU"), in anticipation that GNU/Hurd
(osname="GNU"?) may someday want to use the same code:
if (osname.startsWith("SunOS") ||
+ osname.startsWith("GNU/kFreeBSD") ||
osname.startsWith("Linux")) {
These two patches are fairly straightforward, enabling build system support:
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-corba.diff
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-jamvm.diff
The final two patches consist of largely the ifdef changes mentioned
above. Some other parts look clearly objectionable. e.g. I expect you
don't want to add large blocks of (largely duplicated) kfreebsd-specific
code to src/os/linux/*:
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-hotspot.diff
http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/series/view/openjdk-7/7u25-2.3.12-4/kfreebsd-support-jdk.diff
Thanks again,
Regards,
--
Steven Chamberlain
ste...@pyro.eu.org
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5284b9b6.9090...@pyro.eu.org
Re: openjdk-7 for kfreebsd
On 11/13/2013 07:45 PM, Steven Chamberlain wrote: >> On 11/13/2013 12:29 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: >>> I have finally been able to fix openjdk-7 on mips and mipsel. > > Brilliant! > > On 13/11/13 09:10, Andrew Haley wrote: >> That's an odd patch. > > FWIW it looks right to me that something like this would trigger SIGBUS when > hotspot is run during mips(el) builds or possibly sparc. > >> I'd like to get this fixed upstream. > > Debian Java maintainers might also insist on that, before considering > openjdk-7 as default java. > > Sorry to jump in on a thread about mips, but on kfreebsd we are also looking > to switch to openjdk-7 as soon as possible. And we were advised to send our > patches upstream also. I'd appreciate any advice on how to go about doing > that. Talk to me. > Ideally we could consistently have openjdk-7 as default on all of Debian's > release arches and be moving *away* from gcj-jdk. Sure. So, what have you got? Andrew. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52849762.6020...@redhat.com
Re: tomcat8 review
Le 14/11/2013 10:09, Markus Koschany a écrit : > I intend to upload 3.2 to experimental this weekend. Emmanuel has > already fixed two of the three issues that prevent an upload to > unstable. Once those three packages get uploaded, EasyMock 3.2 can be > uploaded to unstable, too. Thank you Markus. I'll push the updates once alioth is back online. Emmanuel Bourg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-java-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/528494f4.6030...@apache.org
Re: tomcat8 review
Hi, On Sun, 10. Nov 18:29 Emmanuel Bourg wrote: [...] > > Do we need to package the newer version of easymock? > > Yes, easymock 3.2 I intend to upload 3.2 to experimental this weekend. Emmanuel has already fixed two of the three issues that prevent an upload to unstable. Once those three packages get uploaded, EasyMock 3.2 can be uploaded to unstable, too. Markus signature.asc Description: Digital signature
