Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 18:12:49 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Cc: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] Update OpenJDK6 to b23 Message-ID: <201107111812.52110.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E1B089C.90001@FreeBSD.org> References: <201107072002.16059.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <201107081729.46242.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4E1B089C.90001@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 11 July 2011 10:28 am, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 09/07/2011 00:29 Jung-uk Kim said the following: > > On Friday 08 July 2011 04:23 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > >> On Friday 08 July 2011 06:17 am, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >>> on 08/07/2011 03:02 Jung-uk Kim said the following: > >>>> I have a patch to update java/openjdk6 to b23: > >>>> > >>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/openjdk6-b23.diff > >>>> > >>>> Please test and report any regression. > >>> > >>> Can this update be used as a chance to spin off icedtea web > >>> plugin into a separate port? > >> > >> I was going to do it separately but I think it's clearer. > >> > >> IcedTea-Web 1.1 port: > >> http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/icedtea-web-ports.tar.gz > >> > >> (Updated) java/openjdk6 patch: > >> http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/openjdk6-b23_1.diff > > > > BTW, I have alternative port/patch: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/icedtea-web-ports_1.tar.gz > > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/openjdk6-b23_2.diff > > > > Basically, the IcedTea patch for IcedTea-Web is controlled by > > ICEDTEA option and it is turned on by default. > > > > I am not sure which is better. :-/ > > Thanks a lot for doing all of this! > I slightly prefer the second approach, but it is your call :) Now icedtea-web and openjdk6 are committed. Please read UPDATING for the new instructions. Thanks for your feedback! Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201107111812.52110.jkim>