Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 21:51:38 +0200 From: Ernst de Haan <ernst@jollem.com> To: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> Cc: sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG, nsayer@quack.kfu.com, java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Java port behavior ideas Message-ID: <20010525215138.A55928@c187104187.telekabel.chello.nl> In-Reply-To: <20010526045110.A18502@misty.eyesbeyond.com>; from glewis@eyesbeyond.com on Sat, May 26, 2001 at 04:51:10AM %2B0930 References: <3B0C3A63.3020908@quack.kfu.com> <200105241911.f4OJBtS32613@mail.uic-in.net> <20010526045110.A18502@misty.eyesbeyond.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hey.
> > > I'd like to suggest some additional standards and port plumbing to
> > > handle this.
>
> A consistent approach would definitely be helpful.
Agreed. While on the subject I would like to bring in the discussion of the
JDK and JRE port efforts as well. At this moment, we have a port named
linux-jdk (package `linux-jdk1.2.2') which installs the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2
for Linux. However, the linux-jdk13 port (package `linux-jdk1.3.x') installs
the Sun JDK 1.3.x. There is a Blackdown JDK 1.3.x for Linux too, but where
does it fit in this limited naming scheme?
My suggestion:
Current port name New port name
----------------- -------------
linux-jdk linux-blackdown-jdk12
linux-jdk13 linux-sun-jdk13
linux-jdk14 linux-sun-jdk14
And perhaps even:
jdk jdk11
jdk12-beta jdk12
Why keep the name `jdk12-beta' instead of just using the name `jdk12' anyway?
That it's not an *official* J2SDK port in the legal sense?
Ofcourse the package names should also be changed accordingly.
This will allow us to introduce a few more JDKs in the ports collection, like
the IBM JDK 1.3.0/Linux and the Blackdown JDK 1.3.0/Linux, to name a few. I
would be happy to make the transition by providing diff files for all related
ports.
The dependencies, however, would be a more complex story. We should search
through the current Makefiles to see what ports depend on what JDK. Perhaps we
can have an intermediate situation, where the old dirs still exist and contain
a Makefile that just points to the new location. I know this construct is used
in other places in the ports tree as well.
> These are very different purposes and lumping them into one directory
> would be a Bad Idea [TM].
Indeed.
> For jar files which fall into the second category, it might be useful
> to have a common directory which contains symbolic links to all of
> the files. This directory could then be linked to jre/lib/ext for all
> JDKs > 1.2 so that you didn't need a hideously big CLASSPATH.
Uhm, what about multiple versions of the same library? For example, a lot of
software comes with a xalan.jar file. And they all use just that specific
version x.y.z that doesn't work with x.y.w....
I'm not saying it's not a good idea, I'm just wondering how we'll handle
versioning and name conflicts.
/Ernst
--
Ernst de Haan
Java Architect
Jollem Information Technology
"Come to me all who are weary and burdened
and I will give you rest" -- Jesus Christ
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010525215138.A55928>