[lsb-discuss] LSB conf call notes for 2008-06-04
jeff at licquia.org
Wed Jun 4 14:13:29 PDT 2008
Joseph Kowalski wrote:
> Jeff Licquia wrote:
>> Java. Joe sent a message summarizing the current status. Went
>> through; any issues? Robert: looks good. Jeff: point 5.
> Jeff, that's pretty terse. :-)
My question: since we require third-party apps generally to install to
/opt or /usr/local, do we want to write an exception for JVMs?
>> Darren: distros do need to ship multiple JVMs.
> Statement or question?
>> Robert: should allow distros to ship more than one version of Java.
> Distros should be able to ship multiple JVMs", but I don't see this as
> an LSB issue.
Correct; this was an observation about a use case for /usr/lib/java.
>> Darren: handle via alternatives mechanism.
> Wouldn't that be a choice for the distro to make, and not of concern the
> the LSB?
> I'd encourage them not to use this. In the case of a full JDK (rather
> than the JRE we are discussing), it would be a ponderious and fragile
> That said, a distro can use what ever type of rope they want.
Heh. This was just an observation for how they handle deciding which
JVM to use when multiple JVMs are installed.
> The JCK doesn't have an app side.
> There is an "appchk" semi-equivalent for "100% Pure Java", but that
> would kick-out many valid applications. Its probably a starting point.
OK. Is it open source? If not, could it become so?
More information about the lsb-discuss