From owner-freebsd-java Fri May 25 14:29:44 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from kalaid.f2f.com.ua (kalaid.f2f.com.ua [62.149.0.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C294937B422 for ; Fri, 25 May 2001 14:29:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@mail-in.net) Received: from mail.uic-in.net (root@[212.35.189.4]) by kalaid.f2f.com.ua (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f4PLV9K40832; Sat, 26 May 2001 00:31:19 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@mail-in.net) Received: from notebook.vega.com (das0-l90.uic-in.net [212.35.189.217]) by mail.uic-in.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f4PLSGS07484; Sat, 26 May 2001 00:28:24 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@mail-in.net) Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 00:28:24 +0300 (EEST) Message-Id: <200105252128.f4PLSGS07484@mail.uic-in.net> To: ernst@jollem.com, glewis@eyesbeyond.com Cc: nsayer@quack.kfu.com, java@FreeBSD.ORG From: Maxim Sobolev Reply-To: sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Java port behavior ideas X-Mailer: Pygmy (v0.5.8) In-Reply-To: <20010525215138.A55928@c187104187.telekabel.chello.nl> Content-type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 25 May 2001 21:51:38 +0200, Ernst de Haan wrote: > 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 t= he > 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') insta= lls > the Sun JDK 1.3.x. There is a Blackdown JDK 1.3.x for Linux too, but wher= e > 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 Looks fine to me, though it would require lot of repocopying, which is not very speedly performed nowadays (for example we are still waiting for samba repocopies requested about 7 weeks ago). > Why keep the name `jdk12-beta' instead of just using the name `jdk12' any= way? > That it's not an *official* J2SDK port in the legal sense? AFAIK it is not an official port yes, which actually prevents us from distributing pre-compiled package. This question was discussed to death several times recently. Look into list archives for more details. > 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 rel= ated > ports. > = > The dependencies, however, would be a more complex story. We should searc= h > through the current Makefiles to see what ports depend on what JDK. Perha= ps we > can have an intermediate situation, where the old dirs still exist and co= ntain > a Makefile that just points to the new location. I know this construct is= used > in other places in the ports tree as well. I do not see any real problem here. Just wait for next INDEX update and do cd /usr/ports ; make search key=3DjdkFOO-BAR - it should print names of all ports that depend on jdkFOO-BAR. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message