Andrew Overholt wrote: >* rivasdiazx-jpackage@xxxxxxxxx <rivasdiazx-jpackage@xxxxxxxxx> [2005-04-08 20:15]: >> >> Problem+Proposal 1: >> In both cases I found that the package libswt3-gtk2 installs SWT JARs >> and SOs as an independent library (in /usr/lib) and as an eclipse >> plugin (in /usr/share/eclipse/plugins). I think that this package >> should be splitted in lib and plugin. Something like libswt3-gtk2 and >> eclipse-swt3-gtk2 which depends on the former. > >This doesn't work. The libraries are needed for SWT since it has native >bits. > > > With the new package layout in 3.1-fc, I believe that eclipse-gtk2 got folded into libswt3-gtk2. I suppose the argument is that some packages might require only swt, with no reliance on eclipse at all. However, I don't know if this is possible. Even our swingwt rpm requires eclipse. Clearly, eclipse-gtk2 requires libswt3-gtk2, but is it also true the other way around? >> Something like eclipse-jdt (-base?) and eclipse-jdt-gcj. > >No. :) Many discussions took place about this and that's not the >direction that we decided to take. Tom, Fernando, Gary, and others can >explain more if necessary. > > The native bits won't hurt other jvm's. On the other hand, it would hurt gcj. If the idea is to allow the user to switch between jvm's, then we want them to be able to do it painlessly. -- Sincerely, David Walluck <david@xxxxxxxx>
