David Walluck | 1 Sep 02:53 2004

Re: I'm back

Paul Nasrat wrote:

>I'm poking people internally - we have it packaged and the intent is to push to jpackage.
>  
>

By internally I assume you mean externally to jpp? Is it packaged from 
src and up to jpp standards? I still can't compile the darn thing last I 
tried, and it's a lot of work to even investigate why with software that 
big.

Has anyone heard from Debian Java lately? They were supposed to be 
working on eclipse3 in conjunction with jpp, but then that seems to have 
died along with traffic on the wiki (although implmentation of the wiki 
and  not more discussion is probably the next step).

--

-- 
Sincerely,

David Walluck
<david@...>

_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
JPackage-discuss@...
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
Sebastiano Vigna | 1 Sep 09:14 2004
Picon

Alternatives... how exactly?

I was wondering whether the exact usage of alternatives for changing
jre/jdk/etc. is documented anywhere. For instance, I would like to use
the BEA JVM as default--what would be the exact procedure? (A premise: I
never used alternatives for anything else.) Maybe that would be a useful
item in the FAQ.

Ciao,

				seba
Nicolas Mailhot | 1 Sep 09:53 2004
Picon

Re: Alternatives... how exactly?

Le mercredi 01 septembre 2004 à 09:14 +0200, Sebastiano Vigna a écrit :
> I was wondering whether the exact usage of alternatives for changing
> jre/jdk/etc. is documented anywhere. For instance, I would like to use
> the BEA JVM as default--what would be the exact procedure? (A premise: I
> never used alternatives for anything else.) Maybe that would be a useful
> item in the FAQ.

Usually you don't need to use alternative directly (you can, but you'll
feel the pain). Most of our scripts should source /etc/java.conf so
changing the JAVA_HOME definition there should produce what you want.

Cheers,

--

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
JPackage-discuss@...
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
Sebastiano Vigna | 1 Sep 10:24 2004
Picon

Re: Alternatives... how exactly?

On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 09:53, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mercredi 01 septembre 2004 à 09:14 +0200, Sebastiano Vigna a écrit :
> Usually you don't need to use alternative directly (you can, but you'll
> feel the pain). Most of our scripts should source /etc/java.conf so
> changing the JAVA_HOME definition there should produce what you want.

Yes, but in that case "java" would still launch Sun's JVM. Suppose I
want to substitute BEA's Rockit for Sun's JVM *systemwide*. What would
be the suggested procedure?
--

-- 
Ciao,

				seba
Paul Nasrat | 1 Sep 10:29 2004

Re: Alternatives... how exactly?

On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:24:54AM +0200, Sebastiano Vigna wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 09:53, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Le mercredi 01 septembre 2004 à 09:14 +0200, Sebastiano Vigna a écrit :
> > Usually you don't need to use alternative directly (you can, but you'll
> > feel the pain). Most of our scripts should source /etc/java.conf so
> > changing the JAVA_HOME definition there should produce what you want.
> 
> Yes, but in that case "java" would still launch Sun's JVM. Suppose I
> want to substitute BEA's Rockit for Sun's JVM *systemwide*. What would
> be the suggested procedure?

alternatives --config java
alternatives --config javac

Will give you a menu you need to do both (jre and jdk)

Paul
Nicolas Mailhot | 1 Sep 10:39 2004
Picon

Re: Alternatives... how exactly?

Le mercredi 01 septembre 2004 à 08:29 +0000, Paul Nasrat a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 10:24:54AM +0200, Sebastiano Vigna wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 09:53, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > Le mercredi 01 septembre 2004 à 09:14 +0200, Sebastiano Vigna a écrit :
> > > Usually you don't need to use alternative directly (you can, but you'll
> > > feel the pain). Most of our scripts should source /etc/java.conf so
> > > changing the JAVA_HOME definition there should produce what you want.
> > 
> > Yes, but in that case "java" would still launch Sun's JVM. Suppose I
> > want to substitute BEA's Rockit for Sun's JVM *systemwide*. What would
> > be the suggested procedure?
> 
> alternatives --config java
> alternatives --config javac
> 
> Will give you a menu you need to do both (jre and jdk)

However after a system update all bets are off.

Cheers,

--

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot
_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
JPackage-discuss@...
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
Fernando Nasser | 1 Sep 15:31 2004
Picon

[Fwd: Struts 1.2.2 released]

What are our thoughts on this?

Does anybody know if we will have to maintain a struts11 package in 
addition to the new one for backward compatibility of if we will be able 
to just upgrade to 1.2.2?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

Fernando

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Struts 1.2.2 released
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:24:10 -0400

So what are our plans for Struts?  They've just released 1.2.2.
http://struts.apache.org/acquiring.html

Here's what's different from 1.1:
http://struts.apache.org/userGuide/release-notes.html

Most notably:

+ Use Action.execute instead of Action.perform (which I've started)
- Build moving towards Maven, currently still works with Ant
+ Wildcard Mappings

   <!-- Generic edit* mapping -->
   <action
       path="/edit*"
       type="org.apache.struts.webapp.example.Edit{1}Action"
(Continue reading)

Chip Turner | 1 Sep 16:10 2004
Picon

Re: [Fwd: Struts 1.2.2 released]


I've started playing with a Struts 1.2.2 package.  The biggest hurdle
seems to be it needs a more recent jakarta-commons-validator.  I think
once that's fixed it should build okay.  Whether j-c-v is backwards
compatible or not, I don't know; may need to keep two versions around
or somesuch.

Chip

Fernando Nasser <fnasser@...> writes:

> What are our thoughts on this?
>
> Does anybody know if we will have to maintain a struts11 package in
> addition to the new one for backward compatibility of if we will be
> able to just upgrade to 1.2.2?
>
> Thanks in advance for your comments.
>
> Fernando
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Struts 1.2.2 released
> Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:24:10 -0400
>
> So what are our plans for Struts?  They've just released 1.2.2.
> http://struts.apache.org/acquiring.html
>
> Here's what's different from 1.1:
(Continue reading)

Paul Nasrat | 1 Sep 17:02 2004

Yum 2.1 metadata

I've just added support for the new metadata to our scripts

Enjoy

Paul
Fernando Nasser | 1 Sep 22:35 2004
Picon

Re: [Fwd: Struts 1.2.2 released]

Chip Turner wrote:
> I've started playing with a Struts 1.2.2 package.  The biggest hurdle
> seems to be it needs a more recent jakarta-commons-validator.  I think
> once that's fixed it should build okay.  Whether j-c-v is backwards
> compatible or not, I don't know; may need to keep two versions around
> or somesuch.
> 

We have to upgrade jakarta-commons-validator from 1.0.2 to 1.1.3 anyway.
It should be backward compatible.  I will try to rebuild some other packages 
that depend on it to see if it breaks anything at build level first.

Thanks.

Fernando

Gmane