Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 22:07:45 +0200 From: Ernst de Haan <znerd@FreeBSD.org> To: Herve Quiroz <hquiroz@esil.univ-mrs.fr> Cc: java@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Default directory locations for Java ports Message-ID: <200204092007.WAA17557@smtp.hccnet.nl> In-Reply-To: <20020409113017.V52936-100000@puget.esil.univ-mrs.fr> References: <20020409113017.V52936-100000@puget.esil.univ-mrs.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Herve,
Would you have time to try to come up with a patch for bsd.java.mk that
implements the changes we've discussed? I'm low on time-resources :-( I so,
then I'll review your patches after you've submitted them. If you don't have
time, don't worry, I will probably just take a few days longer to get this
done.
Regards,
Ernst
On Tuesday 09 April 2002 12:11, Herve Quiroz wrote:
> Ernst,
>
> > > to Logger. So maybe we should enforce the ports to install the jar with
> > > the version number : ${JAVA_LIBDESTDIR}/${PORTNAME}-{PORTVERSION}.jar
> > > Maybe a wrapper (a link for a jar file without version number as for
> > > *standard* C libraries) would also fit nicely (again I am maybe just
> > > splitting hairs here ;)).
> >
> > Well, this does not sound too bad. What if we would introduce INSTALL_JAR
> > that would call install and use the naming scheme you're proposing?
>
> Good. That INSTALL_JAR will allow the later implementation of the wrapper
> etc. Also, we will be sure every JAR is installed in the correct place.
>
> > Exactly. That would be my next proposed step :-) JAVA_INSTALL_SRC,
> > JAVA_INSTALL_APIDOCS, JAVA_INSTALL_JAR. You're getting a bit annoying
> > Herve! ;)
>
> ;)
>
> > > The same way (keeping it close to other ports scheme), I would
> > > preferably make use of JAVA_LIBDIR (or JAVA_LIBSDIR) instead of
> > > JAVA_LIBDESTDIR (respectively for JAVA_APIDOCSDIR, JAVA_SRCDIR). Indeed
> > > those variables could be used by the final user to set his own
> > > classpath and then the "DEST" would not mean anything to him. Splitting
> > > hairs once again ;)
> >
> > No, I think splitting hairs is very important at this stage. At a later
> > stage it's less important. We need to set this thing up in a clean way.
>
> So, we supress the "DEST" ? please ;)
>
> > > about APIDOCSDIR, what about that :
> > >
> > > DOCSDIR=${__JAVA_SHAREDIR}/doc/${PORTNAME}
> > > JAVA_APIDOCDESTDIR=${DOCSDIR}/api
> >
> > I don't know. There's already a directory specified for documentation. I
> > don't know what the right choice is here. We obviously have 2 choices.
> > I'll look into it some more. Perhaps hier(7) will clarify things.
>
> You're right. In fact, I've done it differently in my ports ;) I don't
> even know why I have written this... err maybe I shouldn't reply posts
> before taking my morning coffee. What I would have said while under the
> influence of caffeine is :
>
> DOCSDIR=${PREFIX}/share/doc/${PORTNAME} # as any port
> Note: possibly have the PORTVERSION in the directory name also (see the
> multiple library versions issue above).
>
> JAVA_APIDOCSDIR=${DOCSDIR}/api # to have all the doc (including api)
> # related to a given port in the same
> # place
>
> But...
>
> In you take a look at the teTeX port, you'll see that everything (styles,
> docs, etc) is located at the same place which is actually
> ${PREFIX}/share/texmf. When compared to a java port it is the same as
> having everything (sources, docs, apidocs, examples) at the same place :
> JAVA_PORTBASEDIR=${PREFIX}/share/{PORTNAME}[-${PORTVERSION}]
>
> But in this case, why would we put the jar in another location instead of
> ${JAVA_PORTBASEDIR}/lib ? And hier(7) says .../share
> (${PREFIX}/share in our case) is for "architecture-independent files",
> just as is almost any Java application/library.
>
> Personnaly, I don't like this way of doing but as it has been done for
> some other non-java ports, we should keep it in mind in our approach. The
> question is the following : "Should we put everything related to java
> port under the same base dir as java is architecture-independent or
> should we dispatch everything in the various dedicated directories
> (.../src, .../doc, .../classes etc) ?". My personal preference goes for
> the "everything in its dedicated directory" as you proposed, except for
> the apidocs that should IMHO be at ${DOCSDIR}/api[doc] (see above).
>
> That make me think we are right to split hairs beforehand if we want the
> java ports to be *clean* and unified. I get tired with having to "find
> /usr/local/ | grep ***" when I want a doc because I don't know whether to
> look for it in /usr/local/share/doc/*** or /usr/local/share/***/doc (or
> even /usr/local/share/VENDOR/***/doc).
>
> Anyway that confirms the above need of INSTALL_JAR and others. We are
> getting close.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Herve
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?200204092007.WAA17557>