[gentoo-releng] multiple virtuals

[gentoo-releng] multiple virtuals

[Pieter Van den Abeele]

Hi Nick,

Is it possible to give me an eta for the multiple-virtuals portage 
feature? Java on ppc urgently needs that feature implemented, because 
otherwise we are stuck with jdk-1.3, which unfortunately is being 
realized by a discontinued product (blackdown).
Given that jdk is already at 1.5, the current ppc java developer fears 
that gentoo on ppc is not going to be taken seriously anymore by people 
working professionally with java. Unless of course when we could bump 
our jdk to 1.4 but that would require multiple-virtuals.

Best regards,

Pieter Van den Abeele


--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-releng] multiple virtuals

[John Davis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1024 bytes --]

On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 09:40, Pieter Van den Abeele wrote:
> Hi Nick,
> 
> Is it possible to give me an eta for the multiple-virtuals portage 
> feature? Java on ppc urgently needs that feature implemented, because 
> otherwise we are stuck with jdk-1.3, which unfortunately is being 
> realized by a discontinued product (blackdown).
> Given that jdk is already at 1.5, the current ppc java developer fears 
> that gentoo on ppc is not going to be taken seriously anymore by people 
> working professionally with java. Unless of course when we could bump 
> our jdk to 1.4 but that would require multiple-virtuals.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Pieter Van den Abeele
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list

Your best bet would be to contact genone as well as carpaski.

Cheers,
//zhen
-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
GnuPG Public Key: <http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen/zhen_pub.asc>
Fingerprint: 2364 71BD 4BC2 705D F338  FF70 6650 1235 1946 2D47


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-releng] Re: multiple virtuals

[Pieter Van den Abeele]

On 08 Apr 2004, at 22:14, Marius Mauch wrote:

> So what ppc people want is blackdown-jdk as default provider for
> <=virtual/jdk-1.3 and ibm-jdk as default for >virtual/jdk-1.3. Can
> someone confirm that this understanding is correct?

Yes, that is a correct. I guess that this could be implemented by 
extending the virtuals file format:

virtual/jdk     blackdown ibm

If an application depends on jdk version 1.4, blackdown realizations 
are considered first, if no satisfying one is found, the ibm search 
space is considered.
Even better would be to consider the virtual file as 'preferences'. If 
none of the preferred realizations is satisfying our demand, we look 
for ebuilds realizing virtual/jdk (if we haven't already considered 
them).
Faster and perhaps easier would be to allow versions to be specified:

virtual/jdk-1.4  ibm-1.4
virtual/jdk-1.3  blackdown-1.3

But of course these are only suggestions. The reason why we are not 
eager to change virtual/jdk to ibm-jdk is that this ibm-jdk-1.* has to 
be downloaded manually, and has a license that has to be accepted, 
making distributing it on a livecd difficult. Also, IBMs jdks lack 
certain features such as browser plugins.

Best regards,

Pieter Van den Abeele


--
gentoo-releng@gentoo.org mailing list