Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 17:09:43 +0200 From: Ernst de Haan <ernst.dehaan@nl.wanadoo.com> To: java@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Herve Quiroz <herve.quiroz@esil.univ-mrs.fr> Subject: Re: bsd.java.mk 2.0 Message-ID: <200310061709.43083.ernst.dehaan@nl.wanadoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20031006145325.GA40341@puget.esil.univ-mrs.fr> References: <200309240954.45634.ernst.dehaan@nl.wanadoo.com> <20030925152156.GA59287@puget.esil.univ-mrs.fr> <20031006145325.GA40341@puget.esil.univ-mrs.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
All, =46rom my PoV the current bsd.java.mk 2.0 is as good as usable. If this=20 assumption is correct (please confirm!), then I suggest we commit=20 bsd.java.mk 2.0 this week. Please test this as much as possible! Ernst On maandag 6 oktober 2003 16:53, Herve Quiroz wrote: > bsd.java.mk 2.0 has been updated! > > More details at: > > http://www.esil.univ-mrs.fr/~hquiroz/freebsd/bsd.java.mk-2.0.html > > CHANGES: > 2003-10-05: > - changed JAVA_VENDOR keywords: 'freebsd' -> 'bsdjava', 'freebsd > foundation' -> 'freebsd' - JAVA_PORT_VENDOR is now set to the vendor > keyword (use _JAVA_VENDOR_keyword for complete vendor name) > > TODO: > - Implement a sorting mechanism for JDK port selection > - Handle JDK/JRE > - Decide definitively the name/keyword for JDK vendors (and then rename > JDK ports in bsd.java.mk) - Handle installed JDK ports using > metainformation available > - Decide if we get rid of the JAVA_HOME overide stuff (Herve: I'm for > removing it as it's not safe IMHO) > > The 4th item (in the TODO list) is quite important to me right now > (maintenance issues and flexibility) so I think I'll work on that during > the next nights... so I can implement the JDK/JRE handling part. > > Can we decide something about the 5th item ? In the original proposal > for bsd.java.mk 1.0, the user had the ability to enforce a given JDK > port dependency. IMHO it's not so important now (and could possibly lead > to some trouble). However I would like to hear from people that have > actually used this feature... or anybody else BTW. Maybe I'm missing > some point here so please tell me what you think of it (especially you > Ernst). > > Herve > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 05:21:56PM +0200, Herve Quiroz wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2003 at 09:01:19AM -0600, Greg Lewis wrote: > > > Well, here is another suggestion. The vendor of the native ports > > > built from source isn't really FreeBSD, its the BSD Java porting > > > team. So a possibility is to use bsdjava as the vendor rather than > > > freebsd. That will remove the conflict in a simpler fashion. > > > > Okay. So we would have: > > > > - "freebsd" means "FreeBSD Foundation" > > - "bsdjava" means "BSD Java porting team" > > > > I'll do that. > > > > > > Herve > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-java@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-java-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200310061709.43083.ernst.dehaan>