Re: RFS: netbeans_7.0.1+dfsg1-6 - This is a little bit important
Le 26/11/2013 13:08, Vedran Miletić a écrit : > 2013/11/25 Sylvestre Ledru : >> On 25/11/2013 20:21, Joachim Zobel wrote: >>> Am Montag, den 25.11.2013, 11:58 +0100 schrieb Sylvestre Ledru: With openjdk-7-jdk:amd64 (7u25-2.3.12-4) >>> The netbeans package does not build with openjdk-7. Since my intention >>> was to change as little as possible and since I am not very >>> knowledgeable about java packaging I did not change that. >>> >>> I'll try to find out how to force building against openjdk-6-jdk. >>> >> Please, don't do that. We are trying to get ride of openjdk-6... >> You should check if the new upstream works with the version 7 (and/or >> backport the fix) > Why is this an issue? This updates is intended for stable only. > Yes, since the information about the backport was missing from the email I saw ( 1383893291.4467.7.ca...@backspace.crrrwg.de), I didn't notice it was a backport request. My bad! Sylvestre -- 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/529490a6.80...@irill.org
Re: RFS: netbeans_7.0.1+dfsg1-6 - This is a little bit important
2013/11/25 Sylvestre Ledru : > On 25/11/2013 20:21, Joachim Zobel wrote: >> Am Montag, den 25.11.2013, 11:58 +0100 schrieb Sylvestre Ledru: >>> With openjdk-7-jdk:amd64 (7u25-2.3.12-4) >> The netbeans package does not build with openjdk-7. Since my intention >> was to change as little as possible and since I am not very >> knowledgeable about java packaging I did not change that. >> >> I'll try to find out how to force building against openjdk-6-jdk. >> > Please, don't do that. We are trying to get ride of openjdk-6... > You should check if the new upstream works with the version 7 (and/or > backport the fix) Why is this an issue? This updates is intended for stable only. NetBeans 7.4, which is new upstream version, requires JDK7 and might be packaged later for unstable, and it is unrelated to effort by Joachim. Regards, Vedran -- 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/ca+oua23oyhjiyjqkydn-65+ns75vq7dbhq_yzyqofyv_3vp...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Replacing openjdk-6 with gcj-jdk as default java for mips{,el}
On 11/13/2013 12:29 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 02:35:49PM +0100, 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 have finally been able to fix openjdk-7 on mips and mipsel. It was a > problem of ugly casts done without taking care of alignement issues. See bug > #729448 for more details. I need to prepare a patch for current HotSpot. Unless you have signed the OCA I'll have to do this work myself. I'm trying to get access to a box that needs strict alignment. 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/529472ab.1060...@redhat.com
