[arch-general] "community/jre" and "community/jdk" packages are out of date - PKGBUILD proposal

[Ionuț Bîru]

On 07/29/2010 05:57 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:
> On 29 July 2010 16:42, Ionuț Bîru<ibiru at archlinux.org>  wrote:
>
>> On 07/29/2010 12:34 AM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:
>>
>>> On 25 July 2010 19:02, Guillaume ALAUX<guillaume at alaux.net>   wrote:
>>>
>>>   On 25 July 2010 18:45, Ionuț Bîru<ibiru at archlinux.org>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   On 07/25/2010 07:37 PM, Guillaume ALAUX wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   On 25 July 2010 18:17, Ionuț Bîru<ibiru at archlinux.org>    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


send me everything

-- 
Ionuț