Control: severity -1 important
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 10:15:43PM +0100, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> On 30/03/14 20:28, Tim Retout wrote:
> > Right, but this does not comply with the Java policy, which requires
> > default-jdk as the build dependency
>
> Thanks for pointing this out. I hadn
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #742405 [src:zookeeper] zookeeper: ftbfs when gcj is default jdk
Severity set to 'important' from 'serious'
--
742405: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742405
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with pr
On 30/03/14 20:28, Tim Retout wrote:
> Right, but this does not comply with the Java policy, which requires
> default-jdk as the build dependency
Thanks for pointing this out. I hadn't seen the rest of the thread on
debian-java@. The versioned dependency and the removal of kfreebsd-*
and sparc b
On 30 Mar 2014 20:16, "Steven Chamberlain" wrote:
>
> Control: tags 742405 + patch
>
> On 28/03/14 20:30, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> > This doesn't seem right to me. "zookeeper ftbfs without openjdk" sounds
> > like a build dependency should be more specific - instead of depending
> > on default
Processing control commands:
> tags 742405 + patch
Bug #742405 [src:zookeeper] zookeeper: ftbfs when gcj is default jdk
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #742405 to the same tags previously set
--
742405: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742405
742544: http://bugs.debian.org/
Processing control commands:
> tags 742405 + patch
Bug #742405 [src:zookeeper] zookeeper: ftbfs when gcj is default jdk
Added tag(s) patch.
--
742405: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742405
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
Control: tags 742405 + patch
On 28/03/14 20:30, Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> This doesn't seem right to me. "zookeeper ftbfs without openjdk" sounds
> like a build dependency should be more specific - instead of depending
> on default-jdk (which may or may not be suitable).
Yes, it builds fine if
Hi,
On 24/03/14 22:42, Tim Retout wrote:
> In the absence of any other suggestions, I've filed
> http://bugs.debian.org/742544 to request removal of the binaries from
> the architectures where zookeeper fails to build. Once that's done,
> I'll drop the severity of this bug.
This doesn't seem rig
In the absence of any other suggestions, I've filed
http://bugs.debian.org/742544 to request removal of the binaries from
the architectures where zookeeper fails to build. Once that's done,
I'll drop the severity of this bug.
Kind regards,
On 24 March 2014 06:29, Ivo De Decker wrote:
> Hi Tim,
Hi Tim,
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 08:42:08PM +, Tim Retout wrote:
> Zookeeper also fails to build on sparc. These seem to be the
> architectures where openjdk is not the default JDK.
>
> This would explain why 3.4.5+dfsg-1 built successfully, because
> openjdk was the default on kfreebsd betwe
Zookeeper also fails to build on sparc. These seem to be the
architectures where openjdk is not the default JDK.
This would explain why 3.4.5+dfsg-1 built successfully, because
openjdk was the default on kfreebsd between November and February.
I'm not actually sure how best to resolve this...
-
11 matches
Mail list logo
