The bootstrap could then be avoided by verbatim copying of this
>> openjdk-17 sources and binaries for all architectures from bookworm
>> to bullseye-backports.
>>
>> Subsequent updates of openjdk-17 in bullseye-backports would then follow
>> the normal backports rules.
>
Le 07/02/2021 à 00:43, Thorsten Glaser a écrit :
> Users will probably ignore that and use it anyway. It would have been
> good if it could be included and kept up to date, but that’s doubling
> of efforts, not worth the hassle,
I wonder if the effort of maintaining OpenJDK 17 in bullseyes
On Sat, 6 Feb 2021, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> If openjdk-17 can't be shipped in bullseyes even with prominent warnings
> that it's unsupported
Users will probably ignore that and use it anyway. It would have been
good if it could be included and kept up to date, but that’s doubling
of efforts, not
m copying of this
> openjdk-17 sources and binaries for all architectures from bookworm
> to bullseye-backports.
>
> Subsequent updates of openjdk-17 in bullseye-backports would then follow
> the normal backports rules.
If openjdk-17 can't be shipped in bullseyes even with prominent warnings
that it's unsupported, then this sounds like a good idea.
Emmanuel Bourg
ill be installable on all architectures in bullseye
The bootstrap could then be avoided by verbatim copying of this
openjdk-17 sources and binaries for all architectures from bookworm
to bullseye-backports.
Subsequent updates of openjdk-17 in bullseye-backports would then follow
the norm
5 matches
Mail list logo
