On 29 July 2010 16:42, Ionuț Bîru <ibiru@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 07/29/2010 12:34 AM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:
>
>> On 25 July 2010 19:02, Guillaume ALAUX<guillaume@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 25 July 2010 18:45, Ionuț Bîru<ibiru@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 07/25/2010 07:37 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 25 July 2010 18:17, Ionuț Bîru<ibiru@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/25/2010 07:14 PM, Peter Lewis wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sunday 25 Jul 2010 at 16:50 Guillaume ALAUX wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also have some suggestions for these packages:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - rename them from {jre,jdk} to {java6-sun-jre,java6-sun-jdk} or so
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> enable us to use different versions of SUN's JVM (Java5, 6 and 7)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well the open jdk package is called "openjdk6". It would be nice if
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> similar packages had similar names, to make it obvious that they were
>>>>>>> alternatives.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same
>>>>>>> scheme,
>>>>>>> e.g.
>>>>>>> java6-open-jdk? Although this has the down side that it no longer
>>>>>>> contains
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> phrase "openjdk" which is probably what some/most people search for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just a thought.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pete.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but
>>>>>> i'm
>>>>>> not against to use upstream name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Ionuț
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well there are several reasons in this renaming proposal :
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) to add some more info about the package
>>>>> 2) to make the difference between versions of Java. ie if we include
>>>>> the
>>>>> "6"
>>>>> in names we could have (in a shorter scheme) jdk6 and jre6, jdk5 and
>>>>> jre5,
>>>>> jdk7 and jre7. Because nowadays, upgrading jre from 6 to 7 would
>>>>> un-install
>>>>> jre v6. As you all know these different versions of JVM (5 and 6 and
>>>>> tomorrow 7) are both used a lot !
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and
>>>> jdk package when version 7 is released
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i always hatted the debian naming scheme for java so -1 from me. but
>>>>> i'm
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> not against to use upstream name
>>>>> What about splitting the PKGBUILD?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So if you want to rename them, how about either calling them sunjdk6
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sunjre6 or else renaming the open ones too to fit into the same
>>>>> scheme,
>>>>> e.g.
>>>>> java6-open-jdk
>>>>> I do agree.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> the description of jre/jdk are pretty damn straight an if you really
>>>> search for java sun it would find jre/jdk
>>>>
>>>> pacman -Ss java sun
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ionuț
>>>>
>>>>
>>> well, when this happens be sure that we will do that. add a new jre6 and
>>>>
>>> jdk package when version 7 is released
>>> I see your point: jdk beeing the "current" version and jdk5 or jdk7
>>> alternatives like Peter said.
>>>
>>> What about paths? Today jdk/jre install in /opt/java, openjdk6 installs
>>> in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk. Wouldn't it be cleaner if we installed
>>> jdk/jre files in /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun-{jdk,jre} or something?
>>>
>>>
>> OK tested !
>>
>> So! Basically, I made 2 versions of the package:
>>
>> 1) this one<
>> http://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_current
>> >
>>
>> is
>> made of the PKGBUILDs of JRE and JDK from community merged and updated
>> 2) this one<
>> http://github.com/downloads/galaux/abs/java-sun-6u21-1.src.tar.gz_custom>
>>
>> is
>> the same as 1) but I removed the construct.sh script and directly included
>> it into the PKGBUILD so that we don't have to get through a lot of
>> unnecessary lines of script for building. This doesn't bring a lot but
>> looks
>> cleaner to me so... may not be that relevant !
>>
>> Names are unchanged, ie jdk and jre. Paths are unchanged ie
>> /opt/java/{,jre}
>>
>> Both have been tested for 32 and 64 arch and compile with openjdk6 and
>> jre/jdk. If a dev wants to use/test for official use in Arch repo
>>
>> Guillaume
>>
>
> thanks for this. i'll add it later today as Dan is kinda inactive
>
> --
> Ionuț
>
I have pretty much the same request about Tomcat... should I wait for Dan to
get back in business?
--
Guillaume
