Discussion about JPackage project

headers Davlet Panech | 1 Mar 2011 19:09

_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
JPackage-discuss@...
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
[My previous post got garbled by my mailer; re-sending as plain text].

There are a few missing symlinks in these spec files.

Here's an updated java-1.6.0-sun.spec -- I added the missing
"alternatives" under /usr/bin to Nico's version.

I think the -compat spec has the same problem, but I don't really use
that package, sorry.

BTW jdk update 24 is out.

D.

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@...> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Boris Folgmann <boris@...> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've updated the spec file for 1.6.0_20 from Nico to build 1.6.0_23. Builds
> > fine on CentOS 5.5. I attached it for all of you and would appreciate if a
> > process could be established that ensures that updates like this make its
> > way to the yum repo.
>
> I've been behind on this, and need to renew my old effort to get on
> the CVS list for this package. RHEL 6, fortunately, has switched to
> openjdk. This saves a lot of packaging trouble.
>
> Here is the current set of necessary widgets to get JPackage release 5
> to play nicely on RHEL/CentOS 5. The java,-1.6..0-sun.spec  to
> incorporate the JDK tarballs from Oracle, the
> java-1.6.0-sun-compat.spec  package to work with the published JDK
> packages from Oracle, the current jpackage-utils-compat-el5.spec to
> resolve the RHEL 5 requirements and prevent it from trying to install
> RHEL 5's out of date components due to a missing RHEL dependency in
> the JDK RPM's from Oracle, and eclips-ecj.spec placeholder to get RHEL
> 5 to stop trying to obsolete the JPackage published "eclipse" package
> with the older "eclipse-ecj" from RHEL.
>
> _______________________________________________
> JPackage-discuss mailing list
> JPackage-discuss@...
> https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss

_______________________________________________
JPackage-discuss mailing list
JPackage-discuss@...
https://www.zarb.org/mailman/listinfo/jpackage-discuss
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Davlet Panech <dpanech@...> wrote:
> [My previous post got garbled by my mailer; re-sending as plain text].
>
> There are a few missing symlinks in these spec files.
>
> Here's an updated java-1.6.0-sun.spec -- I added the missing
> "alternatives" under /usr/bin to Nico's version.

Cool! I'll look into merging them.

I'm not in a good position to do the "joing JPackage and update the
CVS repository" work with this. Might you be in a better position to
do that?

On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@...> wrote:
>
> Cool! I'll look into merging them.
>
> I'm not in a good position to do the "joing JPackage and update the
> CVS repository" work with this. Might you be in a better position to
> do that?

Sorry I'm not with JPackage dev team, I have no access to any
repositories. I could never figure out who is responsible for what in
jpackage, where the sources are stored, etc.

Is there an "official" maintainer for java-sun packages? I have no
idea. Until now I kind of thought it was you :)

Maybe someone else can answer this:
* Is there a public (read-only) scm repo(s) for jpackage sources?
* Where should I send patches to? Bugzilla?
* Is the package java-1.6-sun (& friends) actively maintained /
officially supported by jpackage? It seems nobody cares about it
besides Nico and myself.
* Is there some sort of release or build schedule for official yum repos?
* Is there a public rsync service for jpackage yum repos?

Also, may I suggest that somebody turns off Bugzilla notifications for
this list? They seem rather useless but right now they make up about
95% of the traffic here, so it's hard to find anything in list
archives, etc.

D.

On 03/01/2011 05:14 PM, Davlet Panech wrote:
> Maybe someone else can answer this:
> * Is there a public (read-only) scm repo(s) for jpackage sources?
> * Where should I send patches to? Bugzilla?

The source code repository and bug tracking system are both linked to on
<http://jpackage.org/>.

> * Is the package java-1.6-sun (& friends) actively maintained /
> officially supported by jpackage? It seems nobody cares about it
> besides Nico and myself.

As I said just recently, there is not much in it for anyone since we may
not be legally allowed to distribute anything and the JPackage project
was purposely excluded from the DLJ
<http://www.zarb.org/pipermail/jpackage-discuss/2006-June/010056.html>.

> * Is there some sort of release or build schedule for official yum repos?

No. What timeline would the releases be based on?

> * Is there a public rsync service for jpackage yum repos?

Any of the public mirrors that offer rsync (again, see the website).

> Also, may I suggest that somebody turns off Bugzilla notifications for
> this list? They seem rather useless but right now they make up about
> 95% of the traffic here, so it's hard to find anything in list
> archives, etc.

I don't like them either, but the list admins insisted it would help get
more bugs fixed. Instead, I get these messages multiple times a day and
have to ignore them anyway. So, the only thing that it accomplishes is
driving me crazy.

--

-- 
Sincerely,

David Walluck
<david@...>

[This e-mail has been automatically generated.]

You have one or more bugs assigned to you in the Bugzilla bug tracking system
(https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/) that require
attention.

All of these bugs are in the NEW orREOPENED state, and have not been
touched in 7 days or more.
You need to take a look at them, and decide on an initial action.

Generally, this means one of three things:

(1) You decide this bug is really quick to deal with (like, it's INVALID),
    and so you get rid of it immediately.
(2) You decide the bug doesn't belong to you, and you reassign it to
    someone else. (Hint: if you don't know who to reassign it to, make
    sure that the Component field seems reasonable, and then use the
    "Reassign bug to default assignee of selected component" option.)
(3) You decide the bug belongs to you, but you can't solve it this moment.
    Just use the "Accept bug" command.

To get a list of all NEW/REOPENED bugs, you can use this URL (bookmark
it if you like!):
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&assigned_to=jpackage-discuss-/hcidOUDYf1g9hUCZPvPmw <at> public.gmane.org

Or, you can use the general query page, at 
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/query.cgi

Appended below are the individual URLs to get to all of your NEW bugs
that haven't been touched for 7 days or more.

You will get this message once a day until you've dealt with these bugs!

 Feature list for JPP 5.0
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20
 %post dependencies should be "Requires(post)"
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=134
 Wrong test for %{fontdir} value
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=135
 mailcap.bak file referred i.s.o. mailcap
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=136
 Support parallel install of multiple versions of a package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=143
 JabRef package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=163
 JCalendar: Java date chooser bean for graphically picking a date
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=164
 need a uniform way to specify per-user and per-app SDKs and SPIs
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171
 need dependency-resolving classpath-creation script
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172
 Upgrade jfreechart to 1.0.3
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177
 jgoodies-looks package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181
 Package for NetBeans Platform 5.0
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197
 Update blackdown 1.4.2 to update 03 and amd64
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207
 java3d 1.4.0-01 package submission
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225
 JEdit does not work at all after the upgrade on FC5
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226
 build-classpath and build-jar-repository silently fail with invalid path
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239
 NetBeans 6.0 Platform spec file
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240
 xml-commons-jaxp-1.3-apis Obsoletes: is too vague.
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266
 yum depencies error Fedora Core 6
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=281
 rpm name conflicts with game 'crimson fields'
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=290
 jedit will not start on fedora 10
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=310
 [PATCH] fop fails if JAVACMD_OPTS is set
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=313
 gnu-crypto RPM build without gcj support requires gcj-compat packages
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=320
 circular build dependencies
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=321
 Why should a binary rpm have to mess around with rpm configuration files ?
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=359
 Broken link on developer documentation page
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=363

[This e-mail has been automatically generated.]

You have one or more bugs assigned to you in the Bugzilla bug tracking system
(https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/) that require
attention.

All of these bugs are in the NEW orREOPENED state, and have not been
touched in 7 days or more.
You need to take a look at them, and decide on an initial action.

Generally, this means one of three things:

(1) You decide this bug is really quick to deal with (like, it's INVALID),
    and so you get rid of it immediately.
(2) You decide the bug doesn't belong to you, and you reassign it to
    someone else. (Hint: if you don't know who to reassign it to, make
    sure that the Component field seems reasonable, and then use the
    "Reassign bug to default assignee of selected component" option.)
(3) You decide the bug belongs to you, but you can't solve it this moment.
    Just use the "Accept bug" command.

To get a list of all NEW/REOPENED bugs, you can use this URL (bookmark
it if you like!):
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&assigned_to=jpackage-discuss-/hcidOUDYf1g9hUCZPvPmw <at> public.gmane.org

Or, you can use the general query page, at 
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/query.cgi

Appended below are the individual URLs to get to all of your NEW bugs
that haven't been touched for 7 days or more.

You will get this message once a day until you've dealt with these bugs!

 Feature list for JPP 5.0
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20
 %post dependencies should be "Requires(post)"
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=134
 Wrong test for %{fontdir} value
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=135
 mailcap.bak file referred i.s.o. mailcap
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=136
 Support parallel install of multiple versions of a package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=143
 JabRef package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=163
 JCalendar: Java date chooser bean for graphically picking a date
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=164
 need a uniform way to specify per-user and per-app SDKs and SPIs
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171
 need dependency-resolving classpath-creation script
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172
 Upgrade jfreechart to 1.0.3
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177
 jgoodies-looks package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181
 Package for NetBeans Platform 5.0
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197
 Update blackdown 1.4.2 to update 03 and amd64
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207
 java3d 1.4.0-01 package submission
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225
 JEdit does not work at all after the upgrade on FC5
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226
 build-classpath and build-jar-repository silently fail with invalid path
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239
 NetBeans 6.0 Platform spec file
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240
 xml-commons-jaxp-1.3-apis Obsoletes: is too vague.
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266
 yum depencies error Fedora Core 6
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=281
 rpm name conflicts with game 'crimson fields'
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=290
 jedit will not start on fedora 10
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=310
 [PATCH] fop fails if JAVACMD_OPTS is set
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=313
 gnu-crypto RPM build without gcj support requires gcj-compat packages
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=320
 circular build dependencies
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=321
 Why should a binary rpm have to mess around with rpm configuration files ?
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=359
 Broken link on developer documentation page
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=363

  On 24/02/11 13:08, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 12:55 AM, David Walluck<david@...>  wrote:
>
> This cannot be completely true. I just checked, and a lot of the
> Jpackage 6.0 SRPM's, for example, fail miserably to install on RHEL 5
> or CentOS 5 because they were built with too recent a version of RPM
> and have the MD5sum incompatibility with the older RPM software on
> RHEL 5 and CentOS 5. I have to assume that they were built either on
> RHEL 6 or a recent Fedora, or in a "mock" chroot cage for RHEL 6 or
> Fedora.
>
This was true, but I rebuilt many packages to resolve this issue. Some 
of the effected packages did not correctly rebuilt after the mock 
downgrade so might need manual work. If you tell me which your trying to 
use and still having issues with, we can look to rebuilt the effected 
package
>> fact that the Oracle JDK is non-free and not included in CentOS makes it
>> more difficult to use vs. simply using the provided openjdk.
> Yeah, I can see that as sensible for RHEL 6. Unfortunately, it's not
> very workable for RHEL 5.
OpenJDK was added to RHEL/CentOS as part of the updates, 5.4 maybe ?

--

-- 

Will Tatam
Systems Architect

Red Sixty One LTD

UK:	 +44 (0)845 867 2203 ext 103
Ireland: +353 1 485 3506 ext 103

  On 01/03/11 20:21, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Davlet Panech<dpanech@...>  wrote:
>> [My previous post got garbled by my mailer; re-sending as plain text].
>>
>> There are a few missing symlinks in these spec files.
>>
>> Here's an updated java-1.6.0-sun.spec -- I added the missing
>> "alternatives" under /usr/bin to Nico's version.
> Cool! I'll look into merging them.
>
> I'm not in a good position to do the "joing JPackage and update the
> CVS repository" work with this. Might you be in a better position to
> do that?
>
Nico:  You have joined, the issue is that the non-free stuff are outside 
of the normal jpackage way of dealing with stuff and nobody is quite 
sure the best way to deal with these non-free bits now we have moved to 
a new build system since JPP 1.7 which was the last version where the 
non-free stuff was really used

--

-- 

Will Tatam
Systems Architect

Red Sixty One LTD

UK:	 +44 (0)845 867 2203 ext 103
Ireland: +353 1 485 3506 ext 103

[This e-mail has been automatically generated.]

You have one or more bugs assigned to you in the Bugzilla bug tracking system
(https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/) that require
attention.

All of these bugs are in the NEW orREOPENED state, and have not been
touched in 7 days or more.
You need to take a look at them, and decide on an initial action.

Generally, this means one of three things:

(1) You decide this bug is really quick to deal with (like, it's INVALID),
    and so you get rid of it immediately.
(2) You decide the bug doesn't belong to you, and you reassign it to
    someone else. (Hint: if you don't know who to reassign it to, make
    sure that the Component field seems reasonable, and then use the
    "Reassign bug to default assignee of selected component" option.)
(3) You decide the bug belongs to you, but you can't solve it this moment.
    Just use the "Accept bug" command.

To get a list of all NEW/REOPENED bugs, you can use this URL (bookmark
it if you like!):
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=REOPENED&assigned_to=jpackage-discuss-/hcidOUDYf1g9hUCZPvPmw <at> public.gmane.org

Or, you can use the general query page, at 
https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/query.cgi

Appended below are the individual URLs to get to all of your NEW bugs
that haven't been touched for 7 days or more.

You will get this message once a day until you've dealt with these bugs!

 Feature list for JPP 5.0
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20
 %post dependencies should be "Requires(post)"
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=134
 Wrong test for %{fontdir} value
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=135
 mailcap.bak file referred i.s.o. mailcap
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=136
 Support parallel install of multiple versions of a package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=143
 JabRef package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=163
 JCalendar: Java date chooser bean for graphically picking a date
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=164
 need a uniform way to specify per-user and per-app SDKs and SPIs
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171
 need dependency-resolving classpath-creation script
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172
 Upgrade jfreechart to 1.0.3
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177
 jgoodies-looks package
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181
 Package for NetBeans Platform 5.0
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197
 Update blackdown 1.4.2 to update 03 and amd64
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207
 java3d 1.4.0-01 package submission
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225
 JEdit does not work at all after the upgrade on FC5
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226
 build-classpath and build-jar-repository silently fail with invalid path
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239
 NetBeans 6.0 Platform spec file
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240
 xml-commons-jaxp-1.3-apis Obsoletes: is too vague.
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266
 yum depencies error Fedora Core 6
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=281
 rpm name conflicts with game 'crimson fields'
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=290
 jedit will not start on fedora 10
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=310
 [PATCH] fop fails if JAVACMD_OPTS is set
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=313
 gnu-crypto RPM build without gcj support requires gcj-compat packages
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=320
 circular build dependencies
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=321
 Why should a binary rpm have to mess around with rpm configuration files ?
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=359
 Broken link on developer documentation page
    -> https://www.jpackage.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=363

12	April 2013
32	March 2013
32	February 2013
49	January 2013
36	December 2012
34	November 2012
33	October 2012
30	September 2012
31	August 2012
37	July 2012
45	June 2012
32	May 2012
36	April 2012
35	March 2012
31	February 2012
51	January 2012
41	December 2011
30	November 2011
38	October 2011
30	September 2011
31	August 2011
37	July 2011
31	June 2011
34	May 2011
33	April 2011
46	March 2011
41	February 2011
32	January 2011
38	December 2010
33	November 2010
42	October 2010
37	September 2010
33	August 2010
37	July 2010
39	June 2010
36	May 2010
76	April 2010
45	March 2010
47	February 2010
50	January 2010
54	December 2009
76	November 2009
43	October 2009
43	September 2009
52	August 2009
57	July 2009
57	June 2009
50	May 2009
59	April 2009
44	March 2009
35	February 2009
63	January 2009
74	December 2008
55	November 2008
70	October 2008
53	September 2008
133	August 2008
106	July 2008
121	June 2008
76	May 2008
106	April 2008
43	March 2008
75	February 2008
118	January 2008
74	December 2007
90	November 2007
109	October 2007
60	September 2007
100	August 2007
108	July 2007
90	June 2007
131	May 2007
91	April 2007
109	March 2007
153	February 2007
227	January 2007
177	December 2006
122	November 2006
148	October 2006
132	September 2006
80	August 2006
69	July 2006
74	June 2006
166	May 2006
95	April 2006
76	March 2006
158	February 2006
234	January 2006
125	December 2005
204	November 2005
122	October 2005
117	September 2005
184	August 2005
294	July 2005
238	June 2005
164	May 2005
207	April 2005
409	March 2005
256	February 2005
204	January 2005
263	December 2004
330	November 2004
286	October 2004
250	September 2004
204	August 2004
121	July 2004
278	June 2004
168	May 2004
118	April 2004
244	March 2004
142	February 2004
486	January 2004
194	December 2003
273	November 2003
278	October 2003
207	September 2003
159	August 2003
312	July 2003
390	June 2003
423	May 2003
572	April 2003
415	March 2003
251	February 2003
167	January 2003
89	December 2002

Re: Java 1.6.0_23

Re: Java 1.6.0_23

Re: Java 1.6.0_23

Re: Java 1.6.0_23

Re: Java 1.6.0_23

Your Bugzilla bug list needs attention.

Your Bugzilla bug list needs attention.

Re: What is the right Java upgrade path for RHEL 5 users?

Re: Java 1.6.0_23

Your Bugzilla bug list needs attention.

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun

	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31