On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Stepan Kasal <skasal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello all, > > I have fixed a bug in F-11 and I need your help for decision whether > the fixed package should be pushed to F11 Alpha or whether it should > stay away from F11 itself and released as a 0-day update. Many thanks for getting gcj to build again! > As you probably know, a mass rebuild was performed during F-11 > development (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Mass_Rebuild) > > java-1.5.0-gcj has resisted all attempts to be rebuilt, so the > latest build was (until now) java-1.5.0-gcj-1.5.0.0-25.fc11, > predating the mass rebuild. > > This build contained a i386.rpm for x86, not i586 (the i586 change > was one of the reasons for the rebuild). > But yum "frowned upon" the i386 rpm, leading to the consequence that > the openjdk java was preferred on x86, while gcj was preferred on all > other archs, including x86_64. > This can be puzzling; we have discussed this in the thread I started > a few days ago. > > I have worked around the bug that prevented java-1.5.0-gcj from > rebuilding (it was #500314, if you are curious) and rebuilt it. > Consequently, gcj is again the preferred java on all architectures. > > This new build of java-1.5.0-gcj is ready for the future rawhide > (dist-f12) and also for F-11. The question is how it should be > included to F-11: it can be either a 0-day update or we can push it > to F11 Alpha. > > Before pushing to F11 Alpha, we have to judge the wins and the risk. > - the win is removing the above confusing inconsistency > - But what are the risks that this change introduces a new bug to F11 > Alpha? I need your help here as I do not understand Java. If I understand what you did correctly, the sources for gcj have not changed at all, right? It was just a question of tweaking the build environment so that it would rebuild against all the latest stuff. If that is true, then I would say that the risk is very low and the benefits are desirable. > Would you recommend including the rebuilt java-1.5.0-gcj to Fedora 11 > itself? Yes, if for no other reason than that it will stop confusing maintainers who are trying to build Java packages. -- Jerry James http://www.jamezone.org/ -- fedora-devel-java-list mailing list fedora-devel-java-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list
