--- David Walluck <david@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. [snip] Could you please explain what shared libs have to do with Java packages here? What do you mean by .so files being shipped separately? Don't Java packages just come with either: 1. jar files that consist of bundled-up .class files, or 2. binaries built with GCJ that link with the libgcj already on your system? Since JPP packages are JVM-agnostic, then wouldn't that rule out #2 above for JPP packages? Thanks, ---J ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
