On 10/06/2011 12:10 PM, Miguel Landaeta wrote: > On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 3:24 AM, James Page <james.p...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> I think that this highlights a couple of issues: >> >> 1) The long term future of the sun jre/jdk in Debian - if and when it >> gets removed from non-free then quite a few of those paths are going >> to be obsolete. > > That's right. > >> 2) The fact that none of the tomcat7 packages actually depend on a >> java runtime environment - it actually gets pulled in by >> libcommons-dbcp-java which is not right (can't believe I've not >> noticed that before...) > > In my case, the java runtime was introduced by libecj-java that has > a recommends on default-jre-headless. > >> I think we should introduce a dependency on default-jre-headless | >> java-5-runtime | java-6-runtime in tomcat7-common and switch to using >> /usr/lib/jvm/default-java. That way we are saying that this is the >> supported/tested jre from Debian. > > Agreed.
I've made the change and tested locally - it seems fine, so I have uploaded the new 7.0.22 release (thanks Miguel) with the additional depends for tomcat7-common. >> If someone wants to download a different JRE/JDK from Oracle thats >> fine - and we should let them set an appropriate JAVA_HOME through >> /etc/default/tomcat7 is they want to go down this route - it looks >> like this is already supported in the package and overrides JDK_DIRS. > > Agreed. > >> The above also applies to the tomcat6 package. > > I also noticed that. I cloned this bugreport for tomcat6. I'll take a look at tomcat6 next. Thanks, tony
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
