Hi Matthias,
I don't see the advantage of this approach over well defined virtual
packages, which I notice you seem anyway to implicitly expect
(java5-runtime, java5-sdk, etc...).
Can you perhaps elaborate a bit on this?
Thanks, Eric
Matthias Klose wrote:
[sent to
Hello Eric,
Eric Lavarde wrote:
I don't see the advantage of this approach over well defined virtual
packages, which I notice you seem anyway to implicitly expect
(java5-runtime, java5-sdk, etc...).
Can you perhaps elaborate a bit on this?
Autobuilders cannot work with virtual packages.
Vincent Fourmond writes:
Hello Eric,
Eric Lavarde wrote:
I don't see the advantage of this approach over well defined virtual
packages, which I notice you seem anyway to implicitly expect
(java5-runtime, java5-sdk, etc...).
Can you perhaps elaborate a bit on this?
Autobuilders
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 03:46:21PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
[sent to debian-java@lists.debian.org and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For packaging we currently use a build dependency on a package which
we did agree for packaging (java-gcj-compat-dev). Now with other more
conformant Java
4 matches
Mail list logo