Sorry for the delayed reply, but we all know how life and time come and go.
On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Package naming:
---
* Java programs should be named as any ordinary debian packages.
* Libraries must (?) have the name
lib[version]-java (where the
Adam Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Drop the '-' on the link target. Standard libraries do not have anything like
that.
Don't drop the dash, think about: libmp311.jar That's confusing to
users and programs. Shared libraries do have .so., but anyway there's
no need to copy shlibs religously.
* Libraries must (?) have the name
lib[version]-java (where the version part is the necessary
part of the version, like libxalan2-java, not libxalan2.0.0-java).
There could be a libxalan2.3-java. It depends the software. In addition,
this means having libxalan1-java,
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Ben Burton wrote:
Have you looked through the JVM registry proposals that I've posted to this
list? I put up scripts on people.debian.org almost a month ago (with a post
to this list) and nobody has signalled any problems.
I remember the thread, but skipped it at the
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 04:14:40PM -0600, Adam Heath wrote:
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Egon Willighagen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
--^^ This was
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Egon Willighagen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
I'm not really in favor of a system wide classpath; i prefer the current
system where /usr/bin/program
On Wed, 19 Sep 2001, Egon Willighagen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
I'm not really in favor of a system wide classpath; i prefer the current
system where /usr/bin/program
On Wednesday 19 September 2001 16:58, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 03:33:59PM +0200, Egon Willighagen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
I'm not really in favor
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 09:04:46AM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:03:50AM +1000, Jeff Turner wrote:
There have been quite lot of discussion about the classpaths...
:)
The only good classpath is a dea.. clean one.
Just curious what does dea stand for? :)
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:03:50AM +1000, Jeff Turner wrote:
There have been quite lot of discussion about the classpaths...
:)
The only good classpath is a dea.. clean one.
Just curious what does dea stand for? :)
There are a couple of things that I have found that people think
is
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
I'm not really in favor of a system wide classpath; i prefer the current
system where /usr/bin/program deals with this...
But if the majority prefers it
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 11:03:50AM +1000, Jeff Turner wrote:
There have been quite lot of discussion about the classpaths...
:)
The only good classpath is a dea.. clean one.
Just curious what does dea stand for? :)
There are a couple of things that I have found that people think
is
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
I'm not really in favor of a system wide classpath; i prefer the current
system where /usr/bin/program deals with this...
But if the majority prefers it
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 03:33:59PM +0200, Egon Willighagen wrote:
On Tuesday 18 September 2001 14:44, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Like, CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$INTERNALCLASSPATH before running
the real jvm.
I'm not really in favor of a system wide classpath; i prefer the current
system where
I'd have thought program-specific jars are by definition, not shared,
and therefore do not belong on /usr/share?
False. In java there's precious little difference between programs and
binaries; they're often both jar files where the program simply has a
class hiding somewhere with a main()
Hi
I'll try to summarize what have come up so far during the
discussion.
Naming conventions:
===
Package naming:
---
* Java programs should be named as any ordinary debian packages.
* Libraries must (?) have the name
lib[version]-java (where the version part
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 02:44:00PM +0200, Ola Lundqvist wrote:
Hi
I'll try to summarize what have come up so far during the
discussion.
[snip good stuff]
To discuss:
---
* Should we allow library packages to provide different versions?
Like libxalan2 that provides both xalan1
I'd have thought program-specific jars are by definition, not shared,
and therefore do not belong on /usr/share?
False. In java there's precious little difference between programs and
binaries; they're often both jar files where the program simply has a
class hiding somewhere with a main()
18 matches
Mail list logo
