Re: [Cp-tools-discuss] packaging cp-tools for debian

[Brian Jones]

Grzegorz Prokopski <address@hidden> writes:

> W liście z wto, 13-08-2002, godz. 22:53, Brian Jones pisze: 
> > Grzegorz Prokopski <address@hidden> writes:
> > > Some technical questions (if you want to give me some advice):
> > > - ATM I have created separate packages for cp-tools (javap, javah,
> > > serialver) and separate for gjdoc. Do you think that it is right?
> > > Maybe it would be better to have just one classpath-tools
> > > package with ALL this stuff in it? what about automakejar then?
> > > what about texinfo-doclet? should they all be in ONE package?
>
> So... nobody would like to give ma an advice on this one?
> Maybe I state it differently.
> Are you going to have just ONE releaseble set off tool - I mean
> you release 0.5 version which includes cp-tools, gjdoc, textlets,
> automakejar?
> 
> Or will they have seaprate releases? (in the future)

Releasing, really releasing with testing and publicity, is such a pain
in the ass that if these things are released separately I will be
truly surprised.  Look at gcj, they release as part of gcc.  Will
there be a gcj-gjdoc-1.0 and gcj-javap-0.4?  I don't think so.  These
tools are development tools used by Java developers.  There are good
reasons to release them in some bundled fashion in order to provide a
fairly complete development environment.

> You mentioned tools.jar that we should have. Would it consist of
> what? cp-tools and gjdoc - it seems could be in that one jar
> (and be release togoether, under one name-number).

Well, I think so.  I don't know what the cp-tools developers think
about this.  I'm going to defer this whole issue to them however.

> Sure we have /etc/alternatives/ symlinks, but they must _link to
> somewhere_ - if you want alternatives - you need to be able to install
> those "alternative" packages at the same time - so they cannot
> contain the same files! (/usr/bin/javap for ex.), but instead they
> have their own names for that "alternative" tool, like
> /usr/bin/$sth-$mainname or /usr/lib/$sth/$mainname or
> /usr/lib/$sth/bin/$mainname.
> then /etc/alternatives/$mainname symlink chooses which you use.
> and /usr/bin/$mainname points to /etc/alternatives/$mainname
> 
> Huh... I just wanted your advice on you would you like it best ;)

Yes, so if gcj supplies these and cp-tools provides these and kaffe
provides these we need to have Debian consider employing this
alternatives system for these tools.

-- 
Brian Jones <address@hidden>