java again really

[Craig White]

On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 11:24 -0600, Steve Strong wrote:
> Les wrote: 
> > On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 10:58 -0500, Matthew Saltzman wrote:
> >   
> > > On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 07:01 -0700, Karl Larsen wrote:
> > >     
> > > > Knute Johnson wrote:
> > > >       
> > > > > > Knute Johnson wrote:
> > > > > >     
> > > > > >           
> > > > > > > To install and run Sun Java on F8 look at the simplified instructions 
> > > > > > > on this site;
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > http://rabbitbrush.frazmtn.com/sun-java-on-F8.html
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > You don't need to remove anything before installing Sun Java.  JEdit 
> > > > > > > should work with icedtea anyway.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >   
> > > > > > >       
> > > > > > >             
> > > > > > Some of the things the page says are wrong. But it will be easy now 
> > > > > > with sim links to use the right java and jedit will work. By the way, I 
> > > > > > tried it with icedtea and it did not work at ALL!
> > > > > >     
> > > > > >           
> > > > > What is wrong with the document?
> > > > > 
> > > > >   
> > > > >         
> > > > Funny you should ask :-)
> > > > 
> > > > The document is good but it appears the two lib files are already on F8 
> > > > and it leaves out the most important part. You need to use the new java 
> > > > when you call java from a terminal. I got done with the document but 
> > > > when I would type java -version I got the wimpy version Fedora sends.
> > > > 
> > > >     So I looked at /usr/bin/java and it is linked to 
> > > > /etc/alternatives/java. So I mv java old.java. Then link to the new java 
> > > > with this:
> > > > 
> > > > [root at k5di bin]# ln -s  /usr/java/default/bin/java /etc/alternatives/java
> > > > 
> > > > The default/bin/java will be the latest one in the /usr/java/ directory.
> > > > 
> > > >     With this addition my jedit was installed fast and it works right. I 
> > > > needs to be added to the document.
> > > >       
> > > No, what needs to be added to the document is instructions on how to use
> > > the alternatives facility to get these links set up properly.
> > > 
> > > I can understand how Karl or anyone else might be led to fix these
> > > things up by hand, as above, but it's better to use the tool designed
> > > for the job.  But in order to do so, one needs to know what that tool
> > > is.  It's not as common knowledge as it ought to be.
> > > 
> > > man alternatives
> > > 
> > >     
> > > > Karl
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >       
> > > -- 
> > >                 Matthew Saltzman
> > >     
> > Hi, Matthew,
> > 	I have read the man page.  However, I am not sure this is simpler???
> > It seems to be a tool to maintain dependency tracking for symbolic
> > links.  The man page also repeatedly makes reference to Debian, which is
> > an alternative Linux Distribution.  Given that a newbie, with some
> > rudimentary knowledge (like myself or Karl) can manage symbolic links,
> > and that we may or may not take on faith that a Debian tool will work
> > with Fedora, how does this improve the situation?  I know that I can
> > google this, but a link could be mentioned in the man page to assist
> > with this.  In other words the tool is not yet ready for many if not
> > most of us until either we improve our collective knowledge, or the
> > tools documentation improves to help us find our way through a minefield
> > of system affecting links and link modifiers.  Personally, I think such
> > a tool doing a relatively complex task needs really good documentation
> > about how to read its control script, and what each command does, and a
> > good example showing the effects of those commands on software updates,
> > software interactions (what if a shell is calling Jave.1.4 and you
> > update to Java.1.5 for example).  And where the links are stored and how
> > to back rev it when software has to be removed to restore system
> > functionality.
> > 
> > I know the current thrust is to automate all system administration
> > tasks, but when it doesn't work, who can fix it if the "trail" is
> > obscured, and the author(s) of the automatic tools is no longer
> > available?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Les H
> > 
> > 
> >   
> i just got into reading this thread and thought i'd throw in my
> experience (why not???)
> 
> we had a lot of problems with the default java install on FC7 and 8.
> i have my kickstart file NOT install the default java package and
> instead install the latest rpm from Sun.  then, i added lines to my
> post-install that uses the alternatives command to make the Sun
> install the current best version.
> 
> i haven't seen any bugs with the Sun install (although i read with
> interest some reports of bugs in this thread) and i'm happy with the
> solution.
> 
> in general, i think it's a good idea to NOT rewrite a solution to a
> problem in someone else's code base, so i'm suspicious of fedora doing
> it's own java and like the idea of incorporating the Sun rpm's in the
> distribution.
----
which is fine until you try installing something like eclipse packages
when all of the gcj stuff will be installed as dependencies.

Craig