Multilib Middle-Ground

[Les Mikesell]

Colin Walters wrote:
>
>>  The almost-java versions included in fedora don't run most real-world java
>> code.
> 
> If we're talking about Fedora 8, yes, there are issues because the the
> OpenJDK we ship is a snapshot of JDK 7.

I'm talking about every version of fedora so far.

   We might consider shipping an
> update which doesn't replace java-1.7.0-icedtea, but that people can
> switch to with update-alternatives.
> 
> But for Fedora 9, I don't think one can say "most" things won't run
> with java-1.6.0-openjdk.

I can say that OpenNMS won't currently work with a 1.6 version because 
it's developers have said so.

>> And it is much more difficult than necessary to install a real java
>> version.  Just including a jpackage nosrc-style package to adjust Sun Java
>> to fedora's peculiar needs would eliminate this complaint, although I really
>> think it would have been better to stay compatible with jpackage.org and
>> avoid any extra work.
> 
> Basically, Fedora is a lot more interested in improving our free
> stack.

I don't understand what that has to do with making it difficult to 
install a compliant version.

> It's been well known for years how to install the proprietary
> JDK;

Well known by?

> yes, jpackage makes it a lot nicer for those people aware of the
> system, but I think we should leave it up to jpackage rather than
> putting it into Fedora.

That would have been just fine, but there have been long intervals where 
jpackage has not had a suitable repo (and again, I don't see any reason 
that should even have needed to change across fedora versions since java 
code is pretty much independent of anything else) and in earlier 
conversations here I thought someone said the relationship was 
deliberately broken with portions moved into fedora packages and the 
rest ignored.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com