On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Le Jeu 27 mars 2008 15:57, Thomas Fitzsimmons a écrit : > > > Ville Skyttä wrote: > > > Yes, I've struggled to understand the same decision in the JDK > > packages. > > I wonder why the extra level of versioning is required: > > > > $ ls -l /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.7.0-icedtea > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 26 2007-12-11 14:36 > > /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.7.0-icedtea -> java-1.7.0-icedtea-1.7.0.0 > > > > Nicolas, do you know the rationale? To enable parallel-installation > > of multiple versions of the same JDK, perhaps? > > When you are in closed JVM hell you need to manage black-boxes and for > this reason switching between different JVMs (or different builds of > the same JVM) is very common (talking from an ISV perspective which > was my job when I wrote the guidelines). You can't trust the vendor to > fix its bugs timely. You can't trust it not to create regressions in a > new build (that will take forever to ve fixed). All you can do it get > a range of jvms and switch between them till you identify the most > solid. > > When openjdk gets solid enough people trust the OS jvm, and when java > projects get the clue they need to work with any JVM not just the > particular build they copied in their private build system, I expect > those possibilities to gradually fall into disuse. But right now easy > JVM switching is a must for users. Another reason for parallel JVM installation is when you're working on different releases of a product that requires different JVM levels. For instance, I might have one that is certified to use 1.4.2 and another that requires 1.6.0. I might be able to run my 1.4.2 under 1.6.0 but that's not always feasible. jesus rodriguez -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
