Ian Pilcher <i.pilcher@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It would be a very good thing, IMNSHO, if the Fedora Java folks and the
JPackage folks could develop some sort of co-existance strategy.
I don't think that there are any major issues with co-existence. The
idea, as I
gather from the list, was always to have FC4 be ``fully'' jpp-compatible.
The major issue I see is that the .so files and other binaries aren't shipped
separately. I never did catch the exact reason for this. This means
that if you
run a jpp package on gij then it may run slower because it hasn't been
natively
compiled. The upside of shipping the .so files separately is that you don't
have to lose them if you use a jpp package, and you don't have to turn every
nice noarch package into an arch package just to get the .so files. As I
understand it, it takes much too long to compile the libs on the fly (ideally
what I wish could be done), but that doesn't preclude the existence of
separate
binary packages that would depend on the noarch packages.
The other major issue I see is that sometimes the free packages are missing
functionality (due to either license restrictions or actual missing
functionality in the free stacks), and these jars aren't split in such a way,
either, that you would know what you were missing (not that this is
even really
feasible).
--
Sincerely,
David Walluck
<david@xxxxxxxx>
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
