From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 4 11:07:03 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1C4F10656AE for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:07:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933E48FC2D for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:07:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p34B73NH028655 for ; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:07:03 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p34B72uo028653 for freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:07:02 GMT (envelope-from owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:07:02 GMT Message-Id: <201104041107.p34B72uo028653@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: gnats set sender to owner-bugmaster@FreeBSD.org using -f From: FreeBSD bugmaster To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Cc: Subject: Current problem reports assigned to freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 11:07:03 -0000 Note: to view an individual PR, use: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=(number). The following is a listing of current problems submitted by FreeBSD users. These represent problem reports covering all versions including experimental development code and obsolete releases. S Tracker Resp. Description -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o java/155967 java javavm wrapper insists on diablo o ports/155657 java java/openjdk6: missing symlink for include/freebsd/* o java/155107 java [patch] port java/diablo-jdk16 small cosmetic fix for o ports/154884 java java/openjdk6: Every NetBeans version on FreeBSD 8.1 c o ports/151923 java [patch] java/openjdk6: free and native openjdk bootstr o ports/151042 java [patch] java/openjdk6 Respect CC o ports/150142 java Not installed java/openjdk6 on file system zfs /usr/lo o java/147512 java Crash of RXTX-2.1-7 on AMD64 system o ports/142704 java [PATCH] java/jai-imageio: use $SUB_FILES to dynamicall o java/138729 java java/jdk16: setting 'export AWT_TOOLKIT=MToolkit' caus o java/138728 java java/jdk16: SIGSEGV in java runtime o java/128948 java java/jdk16 built from source can't bind a socket, but o java/128809 java JVM aborted when GNU RXTX write to serial port. o java/123555 java linux-sun-jdk15, linux-sun-jdk16 produce a coredump o java/122513 java native JDKs unbuildable with Linux ones f java/121692 java java/jdk16: Java 1.5 1.5.0.14p8 crashes in RMI TCP Con o ports/120372 java java/linux-sun-jdk16: linux-sun-jre1.6.0 plugin doesn' o java/120146 java java/jdk15: netbeans 6.0 causes java core dump on amd6 o ports/119732 java java/linux-sun-jre16: linux-sun-jre16 plugin doesn't w o java/119063 java An unexpected error has been detected by Java Runtime o java/118956 java eclipse and netbeans break on diablo-jdk15 o java/118496 java Eclipse packages do not work with 6.3-RC1/amd64 o java/116667 java linux-sun-javac1.4 hangs on SMP o ports/116082 java java/linux-sun-jdk16 jconsole is unable to connect to o java/114644 java tomcat goes out of PermSpace, jvm crashes o ports/113751 java java/linux-sun-jdk15: linux-sun-jdk-1.5.0.12,2 - java o ports/113467 java Multiple "missing return value" errors building JDK on f java/112595 java Java appletviewer frequently hangs (kse_release loop) o java/110912 java Java krb5 client leaks UDP connections o java/97461 java Diablo JDK does not report Update level in a format su s java/62837 java linux-sun-jdk14 executables hang with COMPAT_LINUX in 31 problems total. From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 14:39:02 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: java@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C22106564A for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:39:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED818FC0A for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:39:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0123946B3B for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:39:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jhbmac.hudson-trading.com (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E99B8A01B for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:39:01 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 10:39:01 -0400 From: John Baldwin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: java@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 08 Apr 2011 10:39:01 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Subject: Version number of openjdk6 port X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 14:39:02 -0000 Please consider using a better version number for the openjdk6 port. Right now it uses a version number of 'b20_7' which due to the way package version works, is considered less than 0: % pkg_version -t 0 b20_7 > Why does this matter? cfengine uses 'pkg_info -E pkg_name>0' to test if a package is installed. For example: % pkg_info -E 'bash>0' bash-4.1.9 This does not work for openjdk6 since the version number is less than zero. % pkg_info -E 'openjdk6>0' % pkg_info -E 'openjdk6*' openjdk6-b20_7 Perhaps you can just add the '6' to the version number always so it looks more sane? This would match what python does for example: python26-2.6.6 An interpreted object-oriented programming language python27-2.7.1_1 An interpreted object-oriented programming language python31-3.1.3 An interpreted object-oriented programming language If the package name were 'openjdk6-6.b20_7' then cfengine would handle the package just fine. -- John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 15:29:39 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC48C1065672; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:29:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 049C48FC0A; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:29:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from odyssey.starpoint.kiev.ua (alpha-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.101]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id SAA08015; Fri, 08 Apr 2011 18:29:37 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4D9F29E1.6020606@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 18:29:37 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110309 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.org References: <4D95B654.1090900@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4D95B654.1090900@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: adding and maintaining the port upstream X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:29:40 -0000 on 01/04/2011 14:26 Andriy Gapon said the following: > > As a an Eclipse user I would really love to have this. > I think that many people would also appreciate it. > > But I have not been involved in Eclipse porting and maintaining at all. > > So I'd like to ask the people who have been doing all the hard (and very > impressive!) work for many years. > Guys, what do you think about this? > > Here is a link that describes the procedure of adding a new platform: > http://wiki.eclipse.org/Platform-releng-faq#I_would_like_to_recompile_eclipse_on_a_platform_that_is_not_currently_supported._What_is_the_best_approach_to_this.3F__How_can_I_ensure_that_the_community_can_use_my_work.3F > > I've asked people on the eclipse-dev mailing list: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.ide.eclipse.devel/1860 > and they "haven't had success in the past with community contributions of new > platforms". Their biggest concern is the ongoing support/maintenance - fixing > bugs, staying current with the changes, etc. > > On one hand, pushing most of our porting changes upstream should make future > porting easier for us. On the other hand, it's a big commitment. We (you, > actually) already do sort of maintenance work, but currently it seems to be more > of on-and-off kind rather than continuous - but I could be wrong here, because I > have not been deeply involved in FreeBSD Eclipse community. > > So, what is the best for us? So, no interest? -- Andriy Gapon From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 19:11:59 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE03106568C; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 19:11:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:11:44 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: John Baldwin Subject: Re: Version number of openjdk6 port X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 19:11:59 -0000 On Friday 08 April 2011 10:39 am, John Baldwin wrote: > Please consider using a better version number for the openjdk6 > port. Right now it uses a version number of 'b20_7' which due to > the way package version works, is considered less than 0: > > % pkg_version -t 0 b20_7 > > > Why does this matter? cfengine uses 'pkg_info -E pkg_name>0' to > test if a package is installed. Then, I would say cfengine is broken. "0" in that version match string is package dependent, not major, minor, or whatever. For example: %pkg_info -E 'avahi>0.6.20' avahi-0.6.29 %pkg_info -E 'openjdk6>b0' openjdk6-b22_4 %pkg_info -E 'mplayer>1.0.r0' mplayer-1.0.r20110329 > For example: > > % pkg_info -E 'bash>0' > bash-4.1.9 > > This does not work for openjdk6 since the version number is less > than zero. > > % pkg_info -E 'openjdk6>0' > % pkg_info -E 'openjdk6*' > openjdk6-b20_7 > > Perhaps you can just add the '6' to the version number always so it > looks more sane? This would match what python does for example: > > python26-2.6.6 An interpreted object-oriented programming > language python27-2.7.1_1 An interpreted object-oriented > programming language python31-3.1.3 An interpreted > object-oriented programming language > > If the package name were 'openjdk6-6.b20_7' then cfengine would > handle the package just fine. java/openjdk7 uses openjdk-7.0.N where N is build number. I am not sure which is better. :-/ Jung-uk Kim From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 19:48:11 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9679E1065677; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 19:48:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67B0B8FC0A; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 19:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09DBA46B46; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:48:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from jhbmac.hudson-trading.com (unknown [209.249.190.124]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77E928A027; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:48:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4D9F667A.90302@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:48:10 -0400 From: John Baldwin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jung-uk Kim References: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:48:10 -0400 (EDT) Cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Version number of openjdk6 port X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 19:48:11 -0000 On 4/8/11 3:11 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Friday 08 April 2011 10:39 am, John Baldwin wrote: >> Please consider using a better version number for the openjdk6 >> port. Right now it uses a version number of 'b20_7' which due to >> the way package version works, is considered less than 0: >> >> % pkg_version -t 0 b20_7 >> >> >> Why does this matter? cfengine uses 'pkg_info -E pkg_name>0' to >> test if a package is installed. > > Then, I would say cfengine is broken. "0" in that version match string > is package dependent, not major, minor, or whatever. For example: > > %pkg_info -E 'avahi>0.6.20' > avahi-0.6.29 > %pkg_info -E 'openjdk6>b0' > openjdk6-b22_4 > %pkg_info -E 'mplayer>1.0.r0' > mplayer-1.0.r20110329 Hmm, I can probably workaround this then using an explicit comparison rule (so it doesn't use >0). It would be nice if we had an official way to match a package with "any version". Perhaps "pkg_info -E 'pkg-*'" if we assume that package names can never have dashes in them (to avoid problems, with, say, 'foo-*' matching both foo-1.0 and foo-bar-1.0.). Oh, we already have those types of packages: xorg-7.5 X.Org complete distribution metaport xorg-apps-7.5_1 X.org apps meta-port The problem is how can software generically say "is any version of the foo package installed". It would seem we don't support that currently? -- John Baldwin From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 20:28:37 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F357B106564A; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 20:28:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 16:28:18 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4D9F667A.90302@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4D9F667A.90302@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201104081628.25082.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: John Baldwin Subject: Re: Version number of openjdk6 port X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 20:28:37 -0000 On Friday 08 April 2011 03:48 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > On 4/8/11 3:11 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > On Friday 08 April 2011 10:39 am, John Baldwin wrote: > >> Please consider using a better version number for the openjdk6 > >> port. Right now it uses a version number of 'b20_7' which due to > >> the way package version works, is considered less than 0: > >> > >> % pkg_version -t 0 b20_7 > >> > >> > >> Why does this matter? cfengine uses 'pkg_info -E pkg_name>0' to > >> test if a package is installed. > > > > Then, I would say cfengine is broken. "0" in that version match > > string is package dependent, not major, minor, or whatever. For > > example: > > > > %pkg_info -E 'avahi>0.6.20' > > avahi-0.6.29 > > %pkg_info -E 'openjdk6>b0' > > openjdk6-b22_4 > > %pkg_info -E 'mplayer>1.0.r0' > > mplayer-1.0.r20110329 > > Hmm, I can probably workaround this then using an explicit > comparison rule (so it doesn't use >0). It would be nice if we had > an official way to match a package with "any version". Perhaps > "pkg_info -E 'pkg-*'" if we assume that package names can never > have dashes in them (to avoid problems, with, say, 'foo-*' matching > both foo-1.0 and foo-bar-1.0.). Oh, we already have those types of > packages: > > xorg-7.5 X.Org complete distribution metaport > xorg-apps-7.5_1 X.org apps meta-port > > The problem is how can software generically say "is any version of > the foo package installed". It would seem we don't support that > currently? The key here is package origin, not the package name itself. %pkg_info -qO java/openjdk6 openjdk6-b22_4 %pkg_info -qO x11/xorg-apps xorg-apps-7.5.1 It is always safe to find its origin because there may be prefixes and postfixes. %pkg_info -qoX ko-openoffice.org editors/openoffice.org-3-devel I think this would be the worse case in the ports tree: %pkg_info -qo apr-ipv6-devrandom-gdbm-db42-1.4.2.1.3.10 devel/apr1 Jung-uk Kim From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 8 22:28:26 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B11A106567C for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 22:28:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-java@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAE2B8FC14 for ; Fri, 8 Apr 2011 22:28:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q8Jvg-0005IT-3j for freebsd-java@freebsd.org; Sat, 09 Apr 2011 00:13:24 +0200 Received: from static-78-8-147-77.ssp.dialog.net.pl ([78.8.147.77]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 09 Apr 2011 00:13:24 +0200 Received: from mwisnicki+freebsd by static-78-8-147-77.ssp.dialog.net.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 09 Apr 2011 00:13:24 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org From: Marcin Wisnicki Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 22:13:05 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 22 Message-ID: References: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4D9F667A.90302@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: static-78-8-147-77.ssp.dialog.net.pl User-Agent: Pan/0.134 (Wait for Me; Unknown) Subject: Re: Version number of openjdk6 port X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 22:28:26 -0000 On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:48:10 -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > Hmm, I can probably workaround this then using an explicit comparison > rule (so it doesn't use >0). It would be nice if we had an official way > to match a package with "any version". Perhaps "pkg_info -E 'pkg-*'" if > we assume that package names can never have dashes in them (to avoid > problems, with, say, 'foo-*' matching both foo-1.0 and foo-bar-1.0.). You can use regular expression. Everything after last hyphen is a version. pkg_info -EX "^xorg-[^-]+$" > Oh, we already have those types of packages: > > xorg-7.5 X.Org complete distribution metaport xorg-apps-7.5_1 > X.org apps meta-port > > The problem is how can software generically say "is any version of the > foo package installed". It would seem we don't support that currently? From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 9 17:58:15 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 477C9106566C; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 17:58:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (gerbercreations.com [71.39.140.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05A368FC08; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 17:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (localhost.eyesbeyond.com [127.0.0.1]) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p39HwD6h031476; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:58:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) Received: (from glewis@localhost) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p39HwDFK031475; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:58:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) X-Authentication-Warning: misty.eyesbeyond.com: glewis set sender to glewis@eyesbeyond.com using -f Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:58:12 -0700 From: Greg Lewis To: Jung-uk Kim Message-ID: <20110409175812.GA31452@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <4D9F1E05.4070900@FreeBSD.org> <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201104081511.47184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: John Baldwin , freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Version number of openjdk6 port X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2011 17:58:15 -0000 On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 03:11:44PM -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > java/openjdk7 uses openjdk-7.0.N where N is build number. I am not > sure which is better. :-/ Yeah, that's probably not the best either. I was thinking I would bump PORT_EPOCH and make it 7.0 when the actual 7.0 came out, but then OpenJDK won't follow the released JDKs way of doing updates, so won't really work out the way I originally intended. -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com Information Technology FreeBSD : glewis@FreeBSD.org From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 9 18:01:00 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5AD3106566C for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 18:01:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (gerbercreations.com [71.39.140.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7538FC0C for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 18:00:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (localhost.eyesbeyond.com [127.0.0.1]) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p39I0xkL032080; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:00:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) Received: (from glewis@localhost) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p39I0wCX032079; Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:00:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) X-Authentication-Warning: misty.eyesbeyond.com: glewis set sender to glewis@eyesbeyond.com using -f Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:00:58 -0700 From: Greg Lewis To: Andriy Gapon Message-ID: <20110409180058.GB31452@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <4D95B654.1090900@FreeBSD.org> <4D9F29E1.6020606@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D9F29E1.6020606@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org, freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Re: adding and maintaining the port upstream X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2011 18:01:00 -0000 On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 06:29:37PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 01/04/2011 14:26 Andriy Gapon said the following: > > As a an Eclipse user I would really love to have this. > > I think that many people would also appreciate it. > > > > But I have not been involved in Eclipse porting and maintaining at all. > > > > So I'd like to ask the people who have been doing all the hard (and very > > impressive!) work for many years. > > Guys, what do you think about this? > > > > Here is a link that describes the procedure of adding a new platform: > > http://wiki.eclipse.org/Platform-releng-faq#I_would_like_to_recompile_eclipse_on_a_platform_that_is_not_currently_supported._What_is_the_best_approach_to_this.3F__How_can_I_ensure_that_the_community_can_use_my_work.3F > > > > I've asked people on the eclipse-dev mailing list: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.ide.eclipse.devel/1860 > > and they "haven't had success in the past with community contributions of new > > platforms". Their biggest concern is the ongoing support/maintenance - fixing > > bugs, staying current with the changes, etc. > > > > On one hand, pushing most of our porting changes upstream should make future > > porting easier for us. On the other hand, it's a big commitment. We (you, > > actually) already do sort of maintenance work, but currently it seems to be more > > of on-and-off kind rather than continuous - but I could be wrong here, because I > > have not been deeply involved in FreeBSD Eclipse community. > > > > So, what is the best for us? > > So, no interest? I'm very interested in that happening, but I have no time to pursue it. The bulk of my time is devoted to keeping the port of OpenJDK 7 (the OpenJDK hosted port that is, not java/openjdk7) up to date. FWIW, I expect this would require a more effort than the periodic Eclipse updates we do now, but that effort would be more spread out. -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com Information Technology FreeBSD : glewis@FreeBSD.org