Groups > linux.debian.maint.java > #8306

Re: OpenJDK 8 transition

From	Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.java, linux.debian.ports.mips, linux.debian.ports.superh, linux.debian.ports.68k
Subject	Re: OpenJDK 8 transition
Date	2015-09-03 14:00 +0200
Message-ID	<q4Bln-2Ga-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <pRra9-5K8-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <pRAGt-2rb-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <q41hU-1F0-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <q4p0S-1T0-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <q4wF3-4o6-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 09/03/2015 08:53 AM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote:
> Le 03/09/2015 00:39, Matthias Klose a écrit :
> 
>> I disagree. Please revert mips/mipsel back to gcj, or fix the mips/mipsel builds
>> for openjdk-8 (and for openjdk-9).  The other alternative would be not to build
>> the packages for mips/mipsel and file RC issues for packages building
>> binary-arch packages and unconditionally build-depending on default-jdk.
> 
> Hi Matthias,
> 
> I switched only the architectures supported by openjdk-8, the others
> were left as is [1]. So alpha, lpia, mips, mipsel, mips64el and sh4
> still default to openjdk-7 for now.

 - lpia should be removed.
 - openjdk-8 sh4 is "not-for-us", needing intervention from somebody
 - openjdk-7 m68k is "not-for-us", needing intervention from somebody
 - icedtea unfortunately started configuring sparc64 for zero,
   fixed for the next package upload.

> Should we switch them back to gcj now or wait until openjdk-7 is removed?

I don't see a reason to keep 7 for too long. Maybe somebody could identify the
packages which build binary arch packages besides jni bindings or other java
support? IMO we should be prepared to file these bug reports.

Matthias

Back to linux.debian.maint.java | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

OpenJDK 8 transition Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2015-07-28 09:50 +0200
  Re: OpenJDK 8 transition tony mancill <tmancill@debian.org> - 2015-07-29 06:30 +0200
    Re: OpenJDK 8 transition tmancill@debian.org - 2015-07-29 16:40 +0200
      Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2015-07-29 16:50 +0200
      Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2015-09-01 23:30 +0200
        Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2015-09-03 00:50 +0200
          Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2015-09-03 09:00 +0200
            Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2015-09-03 14:00 +0200
              Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> - 2015-09-03 16:20 +0200
                Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> - 2015-09-03 16:50 +0200
                Re: OpenJDK 8 transition John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> - 2015-09-03 17:00 +0200
                Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> - 2015-09-03 17:10 +0200
  Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Miguel Landaeta <nomadium@debian.org> - 2015-07-29 16:40 +0200
  Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Chris West <solo-debian-java@goeswhere.com> - 2015-09-01 22:20 +0200
    Re: OpenJDK 8 transition Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2015-09-01 23:30 +0200

csiph-web