Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Andrew Haley wrote:
Jerry James wrote:
I've just been looking at bug 262401 [1] to see what I need to do to update it to the new Java packaging guidelines. I have 2 new questions about the guidelines.
First, the guidelines say that I must both Requires and Build-Requires jpackage-utils. This bit of code needs nothing in jpackage-utils that I can discern. It has no external dependencies, doesn't ship with any binary blobs, etc. The guidelines say must, so I'll do it, but what is the rationale?
Second, the GCJ guidelines say, "For Fedora versions < 8, no JDK was available other than GCJ so GCJ AOT bits MUST be present." This presents a problem for the package in question, because it consists of annotations only. They are Java 1.5 annotations, so the GCJ in F7 can produce the needed class files. But there is no actual code to compile, so there is nothing for the GCJ AOT bits to do. Can an exception be granted to annotation-only packages (not that there are likely to be many of those)?
Amazing -- I never even imagined that such a thing as an annotation-only package might exist! The guidelines are intended to allow reasonable people to interpret them sensibly. In this case, AOT-compiling wouldn't hurt but wouldn't be of much benefit, so I don't think it matters.
Andrew, if you could propose some wording changes to the Guidelines for this it would be most appreciated.
OK.
"In some rare cases Java packages might not contain any executable code whatsoever, so AOT-compiling for gcj would not be required. An example of such a package would be one that contained only annotations."
Andrew.