On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 11:51 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:20 PM Robert Relyea <rrelyea@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 5/10/22 6:29 AM, Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/JdkInTreeLibsAndStdclibStatic > > > > > > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes > > > process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive > > > community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved > > > by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee. > > > > > > == Summary == > > > This is initial step to move JDKs to be more like other JDKs, to build > > > proper transferable images, and to lower certification burden of each > > > binary. Long storyshort, first step in: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MoveFedoraJDKsToBecomePortableJDKs > > > > > > This first step will move, one by one, individual JDKs in F37 to be > > > built `--with-stdc++lib=static` and against in-tree (bundeld) > > > libraries: `--with-zlib="bundled" --with-freetype="bundled" > > > --with-libjpeg="bundled" --with-giflib="bundled" > > > --withlibpng="bundled" --with-lcms="bundled" > > > --with-harfbuzz="bundled" ` > > > > > > We already made a heavy testing of the behavior, and user should not > > > face negative experience. I'm not sure if this is > > > > I'm very confused on why this reduces certification burden. In our > > crypto libraries this is exactly the kind of behavior we would *NOT* > > want packages to do because it increases our certification and support > > burden. > > > > I'm confused how this would not negatively impact the user experience, > because things like FreeType and HarfBuzz in Fedora have features and > configuration that are non-default that improve the font rendering > capabilities of applications that link to FreeType. I would rather > have our shared maintenance and evolution of font stuff be reused in > Java too... I agree, I don't think there's positives for the user experience here. And I don't understand what actual problem this change is trying to solve? Are people really installing OpenJDK RPM packages, taking the "/usr/bin/java" binary, and putting it onto some other system? Unless that's really the case (and I don't think that should even ever be supported for distro packages), I don't see a reason to change how we build OpenJDK. Also, I am particularly concerned with this statement from the linked follow-up change: "After this change is in air, we will certificate each binary only once, and redistribute." I cannot see how Fedora RPM packages for OpenJDK can redistributing pre-built binaries would ever be considered acceptable. Fabio _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
