Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:43:01 -0700 From: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> To: freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Building Java ports from sources or not ? Message-ID: <20031105174301.GA6153@misty.eyesbeyond.com> In-Reply-To: <20031104182139.GB37133@andouillette.esil.univ-mrs.fr> References: <20031104182139.GB37133@andouillette.esil.univ-mrs.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 07:21:39PM +0100, Herve Quiroz wrote: > I was wondering if it is actually relevant to try and build Java ports > from source. Indeed I used to agree with this policy (mostly because it > allows the user to be sure that all dependencies are installed as well) > but it is quite painful to maintain. Agreed. I think that it would be good if ports could be built from source, but the reality is that this is quite painful for many of the Java ports for a variety of reasons. > Some Java libraries have specific Ant tasks according to the JDK used to > build. In such a case, there is no problem. But most of the Java > libraries won't build on a JDK other than 1.4 altough they may be used > in a Java 1.3 environment (provided you don't use the 1.4 specific > features obviously). While reviewing the recently committed mysql-connector-java port, it was determined that 1.4 javadoc produces some additional files not produced by 1.3 javadoc. This makes packing lists a bit of a pain. More fuel for the fire. > That's why I would like this subject to be discussed, as I am planning > of porting dom4j, which is quite complex regarding the number of > dependencies (mandatory and optional ones). > > There's also the problem mentioned by someone else (I'm too lazy to > serch my mailbox sorry) regarding API docs related pkg-plist content > that differs from one JDK to another... See above. This can be accounted for, but its an additional pain. > ..and the problem where some libraries need to connect to some website > during build (often while building API docs), which disallow user to > install the port while he's offline (unless he use a package obviously). > > So do we need to agree on some common policy or is it a "per-case" > issue? I think it would be useful to have a general policy so that new porters can know which they should try and do. This doesn't mean all ports have to go one way or the other, but as much consistency as possible is good. Question. Does anyone know what NetBSD, OpenBSD or Gentoo Linux do for Java ports and whether they have a policy on this? -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com Information Technology FreeBSD : glewis@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031105174301.GA6153>