From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 5 08:09:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C6D16A4CE for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2004 08:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iota.root-servers.ch (iota.root-servers.ch [193.41.193.195]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DA0C243D4C for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2004 08:09:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gabriel_ambuehl@buz.ch) Received: (qmail 76251 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2004 15:09:45 -0000 Received: from 217-162-135-163.dclient.hispeed.ch (HELO ga) (217.162.135.163) by 0 with SMTP; 5 Apr 2004 15:09:45 -0000 Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 17:13:34 +0200 From: Gabriel Ambuehl Organization: BUZ Internet Services X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <117995622.20040405171334@buz.ch> To: Herve Quiroz In-Reply-To: <20040405125619.GA71140@arabica.esil.univ-mrs.fr> References: <20040405071230.GA23661@anyware12.anyware> <20040405082910.5B7758C16@svbcf02.win.tue.nl> <20040405125619.GA71140@arabica.esil.univ-mrs.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re[2]: Location of Java libraries [Was: tomcat41 producing 28 javadaemons] X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: gabriel_ambuehl@buz.ch List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 15:09:48 -0000 Hello Herve, Monday, April 5, 2004, 2:56:19 PM, you wrote: > The main problem IMHO, is that it's not "right" to install several times > the same JAR. For instance, Xerces-J JARs would be (and are currently) > installed with any port that needs Xerces-J, even if textproc/xerces-j > is already installed. This does not fit well with the philosophy behind > the port dependency scheme provided by the FreeBSD ports system. > But I agree with you about the complexity of dealing with conflicting > set of JAR files, or version number problems... I had suggested to use a > symbolic link mechanism (just like for non-java libraries) a long time > ago but I realized it was a bit too complex. Well taking into account that most projects supply their entire library set with them (or at least have packages that include them all at once), I'd say this IS the way to go for Java apps. Dependencies are just too hard to figure out and realistically, who cares for 100 MB HD more or less these days (especially as Java will easily eat more RAM than that anyhow)? Sure, downloads take a bit longer but I've long since come to the conclusion that a lot of trouble on Unix systems would be completely avoided if everything was statically linked (at the cost that you'd need to update everything if libc had a bug...) and with Java's usual class path nightmare, I'm even more inclined to say give each app its own set of libs, so not to break anything during upgrades... Best regards, Gabriel