openjdk team mailing list archive

[Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@xxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA384

Hi all,

I’d like to ask something that is probably relevant for $dayjob.

tl;dr:
(1) Will openjdk-8 break anything on wheezy?
(2) Who’s going to upload to wheezy-backports-sloppy?
(3) Will backport uploads be made in timely fashion?
(4) How and when should we switch everything to OpenJDK 8?
(5) Some suggested patches for debian/control.in (for Doko)


We’ve prodded everyone to move their Java™ applications from
Java 6 or below to OpenJDK 7, due to all older ones being
unsupported, and virtually all have done so, with a few
being tested soonish.

Now I’m hearing about OpenJDK 7 being unsupported by upstream.

We’re usually running wheezy in production, with the occasional
jessie system strewn in. Doko updates Java 7 in wheezy and jessie,
and backports up-to-date Java 8 to jessie, although only every
once in a while, not with every upload.

I locally rebuilt the Java 8 jessie backport to wheezy (which
amounts to a dch run and regenerating debian/control, plus
making the previous openjdk-8-jdk binaries available to the
cowbuilder doing the compilation, nothing else, thanks Doko
for making this so utterly easy). I’ve denoted this to be a
wheezy-backports-sloppy upload but have not uploaded it to
Debian backports. I also put them into my PPA for the two
*buntu versions that occur here still (so peoples’ desktops,
the Jenkins servers and the prod systems have the same JDK).

Now, the question is: while a move to Java 8 is unavoidable
eventually, what is the timeframe we absolutely must do, and
how do we do that with wheezy being production systems? For
internal use, we have the backport, but customers can’t use
that easily, unless $someone uploads that to bpo (who?).

Another thing I have absolutely no idea about is: will the
Java applications shipped in wheezy work with Java 8? For
tomcat7 I think so, but what about the rest? I mean, is it
unproblematic to, say, just backport a newer java-common (I
already backported the jessie one to our local repo so that
any new installs don’t pick up openjdk-6-* as default-jre)?

À propos: the build logs of src:openjdk-8 show that the old
default-jre-headless is pulled in despite openjdk-8-jdk also
being installed. Maybe a reordering of the Build-Depends is
in order (hah)? Something like this:

- --- debian/control.in   2015-08-28 14:29:30.000000000 +0200
+++ -   2015-08-28 14:30:19.524358262 +0200
@@ -7,2 +7,3 @@
   sharutils, gawk, cpio, pkg-config, procps, time, wdiff, @bd_fastjar@
+  @bd_openjdk@
   @bd_autotools@ @bd_ant@ @bd_cacao@ @bd_jamvm@
@@ -10,3 +11,2 @@
   @bd_bootstrap@
- -  @bd_openjdk@
   @bd_zero@ @bd_shark@

Speaking of the Build-Depends, they could use being put on
less lines as some of the @foo@ can be empty, e.g. I have
this in my local diff to src:openjdk-7 for lenny:

- --- openjdk-7-7u79-2.5.5/debian/control.in      2014-11-13 10:37:12.000000000 +0100
+++ openjdk-7-7u79-2.5.5/debian/control.in      2015-05-21 15:32:26.000000000 +0200
@@ -11,9 +11,7 @@
   @bd_bootstrap@
   @bd_openjdk@
   @bd_zero@ @bd_shark@
- -  @bd_syslibs@
- -  @bd_pulsejava@
- -  @bd_nss@ @bd_systemtap@
+  @bd_syslibs@ @bd_pulsejava@ @bd_nss@ @bd_systemtap@
   @bd_mauve@ @bd_xvfb@
 Standards-Version: 3.9.5
 Homepage: http://openjdk.java.net/

Thanks in advance,
//mirabilos
- -- 
tarent solutions GmbH
Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: ☃ ЦΤℱ—８　☕☂☄
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=Ba5Q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----